Difference between revisions of "FrenchSitesInputtoTEGOp"

Un article de lcgwiki.
Jump to: navigation, search
(Input for WG4 - WG 5)
(What takes the most effort?)
 
(8 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)
Ligne 2: Ligne 2:
  
 
== Input provided by french sites ==
 
== Input provided by french sites ==
 
=== Input for WG1 : Monitoring & Metrics ===
 
* WG1 Sub-Wiki: https://twiki.cern.ch/twiki/bin/view/LCG/WLCGTegOperationsWG1
 
* What works well?
 
**  GGUS
 
* What is used ?
 
* What are the three main problems?
 
 
=== Input for WG2 : Support tools & Underlying services + WLCG operations ===
 
* Scope ====
 
** Support tools : Ticketing, Accounting tools, Request trackers,Administration tools [GOCDB, CIC]
 
* Underlying services : Messaging services, Information services
 
* WG2 Sub-Wiki : https://twiki.cern.ch/twiki/bin/view/LCG/WLCGTegOperationsWG2
 
* What works well? What is used ?
 
* What are the three main problems?
 
 
=== Input for WG3 : Application Software Management  ===
 
* WG3 Sub-Wiki : https://twiki.cern.ch/twiki/bin/view/LCG/WLCGTegOperationsWG3
 
* What works well? What is used ?
 
* What are the three main problems?
 
 
 
===  Input for WG4 - WG 5  Mware operational requirements, distribution, deployment, distribution  ===
 
===  Input for WG4 - WG 5  Mware operational requirements, distribution, deployment, distribution  ===
  
Ligne 33: Ligne 12:
  
 
==== What takes the most effort?====
 
==== What takes the most effort?====
* understanding the Middelware dependencies  
+
* understanding the Middelware dependencies
 +
* reverse engineering of yaim scripts to understand what has changed in Mware configuration !
  
 
==== What can be improved about operational procedures?====
 
==== What can be improved about operational procedures?====
Ligne 42: Ligne 22:
  
 
==== Strategic directions you would like to recommend====
 
==== Strategic directions you would like to recommend====
* Middelware compatibilities with the larger set of technical constraints (yaim/quattor, NAS/SAN storage infrastructure,...)
+
* Improving Middelware compatibility with the larger set of technical constraints (yaim/quattor, NAS/SAN storage infrastructure,...), minimizing dependencies and extending the compliance with existing standard
  
 
==== Other comments====
 
==== Other comments====
Ligne 49: Ligne 29:
 
* Dropped too early : 32 bits UI
 
* Dropped too early : 32 bits UI
 
* SL6 WN and disk servers may be needed soon (new hardware procurements)
 
* SL6 WN and disk servers may be needed soon (new hardware procurements)
* Mware distribution via EMI and UMD : no enhancement of interfaces ergonomics
+
* Mware distribution via EMI and UMD : no enhancement of interfaces ergonomics (compared to what was available with gLite)

Latest revision as of 18:02, 16 novembre 2011

BACK to TEG

Input provided by french sites

Input for WG4 - WG 5 Mware operational requirements, distribution, deployment, distribution

What is in use currently and works well?

  • Mware integration using Quattor (long-term support essential)

Top problems

  • Mware usability : Too many information on logfiles. Finding the good information is too hard.

Log management in order to improve Incident Detection and Traceability

What takes the most effort?

  • understanding the Middelware dependencies
  • reverse engineering of yaim scripts to understand what has changed in Mware configuration !

What can be improved about operational procedures?

  • A clear and single channel to announce a new release and documentation

What can be dropped?

Strategic directions you would like to recommend

  • Improving Middelware compatibility with the larger set of technical constraints (yaim/quattor, NAS/SAN storage infrastructure,...), minimizing dependencies and extending the compliance with existing standard

Other comments

  • Confidence in Mware : EGI staged-rollout on best effort basis. Is this sustainable ?
  • Still needed : relocatable version of Mware
  • Dropped too early : 32 bits UI
  • SL6 WN and disk servers may be needed soon (new hardware procurements)
  • Mware distribution via EMI and UMD : no enhancement of interfaces ergonomics (compared to what was available with gLite)