Difference between revisions of "Software and Computing Review 7"

Latest revision as of 14:02, 31 January 2024

JLab Computing Review
February 1-2, 2024

Indico Site

The agenda and remote connection information is on the Indico Site. To get in you need to either (a) log in with your JLab Indico username and password (which is in principle different than your CUE username/password) or (b) use the access key published on this private wiki page.

Agenda

See the Indico Site (above).

Connection Information

See the Indico Site (above).

Meetings

Instructions for Handout Notes

Following 2021 example, we’d like a short (<5 page) pre-review document. Please upload ~7 days prior to the meeting (Friday, Jan 26 would be fine).

Template / Sections

• Overview of Hall / Experimental approach (keep this short and sweet)
• Simulation requirements / plans
• Triggering and Online Analysis Plans/Approach
  • Updates on SRO progress or plans (as applicable)
• Analysis Workflow(s)
  • Core software / frameworks you plan to use
  • Outline reconstruction process including calibrations
• Summary of computing requirements (CPU, Disk, Tape, Network) for next 5 years
  • Should be similar to projections you provided in summer 2023.
• Summarize and call-out any changes/updates
  • Include off-site computing plans

Documents

The draft for the handout can be found here. Please ask the owner for permission if you want to edit it.

In addition, all documents will be uploaded to the DocDB:

• Announcement
• Charge
• Talk
• Document

Previous Reviews

• Software and Computing Review 6, December 16-17, 2021
  • Final Report for the 2021 Review
    • Recommendations:
      • Seek ways in EPSCI to engage further with the halls in supporting the adoption and use of common tools and sharing of expertise across the Halls. Furthermore, establish mechanisms to evaluate and optimize this engagement (software portfolio, effort distribution, addressing gaps) on an ongoing basis. Current examples might include [...] continuous integration and testing for Hall D [...].
      • Develop a data and analysis preservation strategy for JLab’s experimental programs.
      • Phase-II will bring a big increase in data rates. Estimates show this can be covered by existing resources, but it’s not clear what testing has been done.
      • Hall D appears in need of a data catalog with custom metadata support, and workflow management supporting a close coupling with data management.
      • Improvements seem to be needed in software infrastructure: continuous integration (CI), testing, and documentation.
• Software and Computing Review 5, November 27-28, 2018
  • Final Report for the 2018 Review
    • Overall, GlueX plans and actual developments are excellent and appear to match what is needed to produce timely and important science.
    • Recommendations:
      • Prepare to support increasing interest in machine learning and modern data science tools, possibly in collaboration with other labs to leverage existing solutions.
      • Consider increasing the central support for offsite resource access, especially for OSG and data transfers, leveraging work already done by GlueX and CLAS12 and at other laboratories.
• Software Review 4 JLab, November 10-11, 2016
  • Final Report for the 2016 Review
• February 2015 Software Review
  • Final Report for the 2015 Review
• November 2013 Software Review
  • Final Report for the 2013 Review
• June 2012 Software Review
  • Final Report from the 2012 Review(PDF)