\uD83D\uDDD3 Date
\uD83D\uDC65 Participants
Lancs: Gerard, Matt, Steven
Glasgow: Sam
Apologies:
CC:
\uD83E\uDD45 Goals
List of Epics
New tickets
Consider new functionality / items
Detailed discussion of important topics
Site report activity
\uD83D\uDDE3 Discussion topics
Current status of Echo Gateways / WNs testing
Recent sandbox’s for review / deployments:
Item | Presenter | Notes | |
|---|---|---|---|
Operational Issues (Gateway Auth failures) | Upgrades of GWs this week; Main GWs complete; Alice in progress AAA gateways with large numbers of connections:  (gw10): | ||
cms-aaa naming convention | cms-aaa is the only remaining personality to use proxy/ceph as the xrootd service names Separate naming convention would be more appropriate, to have main/supporting (not so urgent). CC created, but due to be reviewed December | ||
XRootD Managers De-VMWareification |
Option 2 preferred for efficiency, but Option 1 decided on Option 1 would be simpler to implement for a temporary fix, as the move would be reversed antares tpc nodes to be moved to an echo leafsw, to confirm ipv4 real estate with James | ||
Compilation and rollout status with XrdCeph and rocky 8: 5.7.x | |||
Shoveler | |||
Deletion studies through RDR | |||
Deletions | XRD-83 - Getting issue details... STATUS | ||
XRootD Writable Workernode Gateway Hackaton | XRootD Writable Workernode Gateway Hackaton (XWWGH) Tues 12th Nov 1600 Outcomes | ||
Xrootd testing framework | |||
100 GbE Gateway testing: | /wiki/spaces/UK/pages/215941180 | ||
UKSRC Storage Architecture | |||
Tokens Status |
|
on GGUS:
Site reports
Lancaster: Day 2 of our mini-DC run was a bit spoilt by Ceph having a wobbly, presumably because of some sick OSDs. As Matt understands it, we hit the last little bit of backfilling backlog we had to do but rather then be a weight lifted off our cluster things “cramped up” focussing operations on a small number of PGs. (Gerard can correct me if I have the wrong end of the wrong stick). To top it off one of our OSDs keeled over physically.
Our bindfs tests were disappointing, our bonnie tests have read rates through the bind mount ~1/8th that of what we see through the regular one. Write seems less effected, and latency doesn’t appear to be impacted. Using the bindfs “multithread” option didn’t help much. Probably culprit is the tiny (and AFAICS unchangable) default bindfs blocksize But these were noddy bonnie tests, and maybe this is the wrong tool? Would noddy dd be better?
Glasgow
✅ Action items
How to replace the original functionality of fstream monitoring, now opensearch has replaced existing solutions.