FrenchSitesInputtoTEGOp: Difference between revisions

Un article de lcgwiki.
Jump to navigation Jump to search
← Différence précédenteDifférence suivante →
Chollet (talk | contribs)
2,458 edits
Chollet (talk | contribs)
2,458 edits
No edit summary
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  ===


Version du 17:14, 14 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

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

  • Middelware compatibilities with the larger set of technical constraints (yaim/quattor, NAS/SAN storage infrastructure,...)

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
Récupérée de « https://lcg.in2p3.fr/index.php?title=FrenchSitesInputtoTEGOp&oldid=6305 »