So that's the workshop over - it really flew by after all of the preparation that was required to set things up! Thanks to everyone at NeSC for their help with the organisation and operations on the day. Thanks also to everyone who gave presentations and took tutorials at the workshop, I think these really allowed people to learn about SRM2.2 and all of the details required to configure DPM, dCache or StoRM storage at their site.
Day 1 started with parallel dCache Tier-1 and StoRM sessions. It was particularly good for the StoRM developers to get together with interested sites as they haven't had much of a chance to do this before. For dCache (once the main developer arrived!), FZK and NDGF were able to pass on information to the developers and other Tier-1s about performing the upgrade to v1.8.0. It was noted that NDGF are currently just using 1.8.0 as a drop in replacement for 1.7.0 - space management has yet to be turned on. FZK had experienced a few more problems - primarily due to a high load on PNFS. However, the eventual cause was traced to a change in pool names without a subsequent re-registration - this is unrelated to 1.8.0.
I had arranged for lunch for the people who turned up in the morning. Of course, I should have known that a few extras would have turned up - but I didn't expect quite as many. Luckily we had enough food, just. I'll know better for next time!
The main workshop started in the afternoon where the concepts of SRM2.2 were presented in order to educate sites and give them the language that would be used during the rest of the workshop. Thanks to Flavia Donno and Maarten Litmaath describing the current status. We then moved onto short presentations from each of the storage developers, outlining the system and how SRM2.2 was implemented. Again, this helped to explain concepts to sites and enabled them to see the differences with the software that is currently deployed.
Stephen Burke gave a detailed presentation about v1.3 of the GLUE schema. This is important as it was introduced to allow for SRM2.2 specific information to be published in the information system. Sites need to be aware of what their SEs should be publishing - there should be a SAM test that will check this out.
The final session of the day was titled "What do experiments want from your storage?". I was hoping that we could get a real idea of how ATLAS, CMS and LHCb would want to use SRM2.2 at the sites, particularly Tier-2s. LHCb appear to have the clearest plan of what they want to do (although they don't want to use Tier-2 disk) as they were presenting exactly the data types and space tokens that they would like set up. CMS presented gave a variety of ideas for how they could use SRM2.2 to help with the data management. While these are not finalised I think they should form the basis for further discussion between all interested parties. For ATLAS, Graeme Stewart gave another good talk about their computing model and data management. Unfortunately, it was clear that ATLAS don't really have a plan for SRM2.2 at Tier-1s or 2s. He talked about ATLAS_TAPE and ATLAS_DISK space tokens, which is a start, but what is the difference between this and just having separate paths (atlas/disk and atlas/tape) in the SRM namespace? What was clear, however, was that ATLAS (and the other experiments) want storage to be available, accessible and reliable. This is essential for both WAN data transfers and local access for compute jobs and is really what the storage community have to focus on prior to the start of data taking - we are here for the physics after all!
So, Day 1 went well, that is until we had a power cut just after the final talk! To be honest though, it turned out to be a good thing as it meant people stopped working on their laptops and got out to the pub. This was another reason for having the workshop - allowing people to mix and match faces to the names that they have seen on the mailing lists. It all helps to foster that community spirit that we need to support each other,
OK, enough for now. I'll talk about Day 2 later.
Just thought I would let everyone know that we have now reached the 100th posting on this little blog and it also happens to fall exactly on the 1 year anniversary of it's creation. Strange how these two milestones coincide like that. Doing the maths, it means that there are about 2 postings per week. What I don't know, however, is whether or not this implies that there is too much or too little to talk about when it comes to Grid storage? Maybe it means I should be doing more work.
