Open Science Grid

D. Petravick, FNAL

I2 Spring Meeting/HEP SIG

May 3, 2005

5/27/05 D. Petravick - Open Science GRid 2

Open Science GridConsortium

• The Open Science Grid (OSG) Consortiumwas formed in 2004 by teams from U.S.universities and national laboratories in orderto build and support a production qualitypeta-scale Grid infrastructure for large scalescience.

• Partners with EGEE, LCG and TerraGrid.• Non US institutions.may be partners.

– Case under consideration is when an applicationbring s in non US sites.

5/27/05 D. Petravick - Open Science GRid 3

CMS and U.S. OSGparticipants

5/27/05 D. Petravick - Open Science GRid 4

OSG Organizational Structure

5/27/05 D. Petravick - Open Science GRid 5

Two Important TechnicalGroups

• Storage (active for a year)

• Network (just forming)

• Buffering Storage and networking arecomplimentary activities.

5/27/05 D. Petravick - Open Science GRid 6

Storage Technical Group

• The Storage Technical group is lead by PaulSheldon (Vanderbilt) and Robert Kennedy(Fermilab).

• The main activity of the group is to deploymanaged storage elements on the OSG.– Independently implemented, interoperating, SE

are being deployed.• LBL DRM• Fermilab/DESY Dcache.• Interest in from the IBP people (Tennessee)• Possible interest from Xootd people (SLAC)

5/27/05 D. Petravick - Open Science GRid 7

OSG Storage element

5/27/05 D. Petravick - Open Science GRid 8

March Tape IngestDemonstration

5/27/05 D. Petravick - Open Science GRid 9

Current Production

5/27/05 D. Petravick - Open Science GRid 10

Current (POSIX side) reads

5/27/05 D. Petravick - Open Science GRid 11

CMS plans

• SE at US Tier 1 (FNAL)

• SE at US Tier 2s (Caltech, Florida, MIT,Nebraska, Purdue, UCSD, Wisconsin)

• Partial deployment and use in Recentlyconcluded Service Challenge.

• Storage Embedded in OSG.

5/27/05 D. Petravick - Open Science GRid 12

Network Technical Group

• The Network Technical group is lead byShawn McKee(Michigan) and DonaldPetravick (Fermilab).

• We are beginning to organize.– Have seeded a monitoring activity.

– Want to consider the needs of the HEPexperiments exploiting OSG.

5/27/05 D. Petravick - Open Science GRid 13

Evident Areas of Interest

• Understand the impact of ourapplication on the existing networksinfrastructures.– Large Data Transfers for LHC experiments

within the US are just being organized.

• HEP desires an “overlay network”composed from all available resources

5/27/05 D. Petravick - Open Science GRid 14

Mona Lisa Monitoring

• For OSG-ITB– Integration Test Bed

• http://gocmon.uits.iupui.edu:8888/

5/27/05 D. Petravick - Open Science GRid 15

HEP Overlay network

• Esnet and I2.

• Ultralight

• US university initiatives.

• LHC net.

• T[12] <-> T[12] worldwide

5/27/05 D. Petravick - Open Science GRid 16

5/27/05 D. Petravick - Open Science GRid 17

UltraLightUltraLight Network: Network: PHASE 2PHASE 2

Move into productionMove into production(2007)(2007)

Optical switching fullyOptical switching fullyenabled amongst primaryenabled amongst primarysitessites

Integrated internationalIntegrated internationalinfrastructureinfrastructure

5/27/05 D. Petravick - Open Science GRid 18

FNAL Inbound traffic

5/27/05 D. Petravick - Open Science GRid 19

Summary

• The OSG is a significant computationalresource.

• HENP stakeholders are counting on the OSGto provide a grid framework in the US for theLHC.

• Many contributions beyond the DOE labs andT2 centers.

• OSG is in a position to exploit resourcesopportunistically, including high impactnetworks.

5/27/05 D. Petravick - Open Science GRid 20

Grid computing and nationalinfrastructure.

• In HEP tape is usedin data movement,not only dataarchive.

• Data movement is atnational scales.

• D0, one currentHEP system.

5/27/05 D. Petravick - Open Science GRid 21