1   Abstract¶

We describe the proposed design and implementation of the LSST Alert Distribution Serice, which provides rapid dissemination of alerts as well as the capability to apply simple filters to alert streams. At time of writing, this service is still under development; this “living document” describes current thinking, but is expected to evolve over the course of LSST construction.

2   Alert Serialization¶

3   Alert Distribution¶

Alert distribution uses Apache Kafka [2], an open source streaming platform that can be used for real-time and continuous data pipelines. Kafka is a scalable pub/sub message queue based on a commit log. It is used in production at scale at companies such as LinkedIn, Netflix, and Microsoft to process over 1 trillion messages per day.

Kafka collects messages from processes called “producers,” which are organized into distinct streams called “topics.” Downstream “consumers” pull messages by subscribing to topics. Topics can be split into “partitions” that may be distributed across multiple machines and allow consumers to read in parallel as “consumer groups.” Data can be replicated by deploying Kafka in cluster mode over several servers called “brokers.” We will refer to these brokers below as “Kafka brokers” to distinguish from the LSST alert downstream “community brokers” that will process LSST alerts.

For LSST alert distribution, Kafka and the accompanying Zookeeper can be deployed as Docker containers from the DockerHub image repository maintained by Confluent Inc., the team that created Kafka. The latest release of alert_stream uses Kafka and Zookeeper from Confluent platform release 4.1.1, which was the latest version available as of the dmtn-081-2018-06-18 tagged release of alert_stream used in DMTN-081. As of the writing of this document, Confluent platform release 5.0 corresponding to Apache Kafka version 2.0 is now available. The producer used for generating and sending data to Kafka and template scripts for consumers of the stream are provided in the GitHub repository at https://github.com/lsst-dm/alert_stream, which can also be built as a Docker image and deployed as containers. DMTN-028 [4] provides details about benchmarking deployment of the different components.

4   Alert Filtering¶

Alert filters can be written using Python functions acting solely on the contents of the alert packets, as described in the Data Products Definition Document. Using Python allows scientific users to write complex functions in a language that may be familiar and approachable to most astronomers. If permitted, scientists could also potentially use modules outside of the standard library to deploy, e.g., machine learning algorithms on alerts. User-provided code, however, presents challenges. The filter submission process needs to be controlled. Access to the host system needs to be restricted to prevent malicious activity and security concerns. To mitigate the concerns of user-provided code, in this design each filter runs separately and isolated in its own container. The filter is only allowed access to the approved libraries available in the Python environment provided in the container, and permissions of the container can be restricted so as to minimize effects on the host.

A filter is constructed as a consumer of the Kafka topic containing the full stream and a producer back to a Kafka topic for the filtered stream. This filtered stream can then be read by another consumer or directed to another output method for storage. The downstream consumer of the filtered stream can itself be another filter, meaning that this scheme allows simple chaining of filters.

Currently, filters are defined in lsst.alert.stream.filters in the alert_stream repository. Each filter is constructed as a class with a filter function. Below is an example of code defining a simple filter.

class Filter001(AlertFilter):
    def filter(self, alert):
        if ((alert['diaSource']['snr'] > 5) &
            (alert['diaSource']['diffFlux'] > 0.00003631)):  # 20th mag
            return True
        else:
            return False

Filters inherit from an AlertFilter base class. When the filter class is called on each alert, the visit ID is read. Up to 20 alerts per visit that pass the filter, i.e., return True, are forwarded to its local Kafka instance to a topic for the filtered alerts, named for the class. In the above example, alerts are sent to a new topic named “Filter001.” The filter detects the beginning of a new visit when the visit ID changes from one alert to the next. This assumes that all alerts from a visit will be received before the next visit’s alerts arrive. Otherwise, more than 20 alerts may pass through the filter.

An excess of 20 alerts is not cause for concern but is defined by numBrokerAlerts (Number of full-sized alerts that can be received per visit per user) in performance requirement DMS-REQ-0343 which was put in place as a coarse load-balancing measure. Raising this limit would potentially produce scientific gains as a larger number of alerts of interest would be available to scientific users. Currently, the first 20 alerts passing the filter are made available to users, and there is no ability to rank order or otherwise choose the most scientifically interesting 20 filtered alerts. Increasing the limit, however, would also increase the network bandwidth necessary to accommodate larger filtered streams. The current requirement for numBrokerUsers (Supported number of simultaneous users connected to the LSST alert filtering system) is set at 100, meaning that the system is at least required to support the bandwidth needed for 100 filtered streams with 20 alerts per visit. Increasing the filtered alert limit could then mean that fewer users would be able to be supported due to networking limitations. DMS-REQ-0343 notes that the requirement could also be satisfied by cutting down the content of filtered alerts and potentially removing fields to decrease the size of filtered streams.

5   Alert Database¶

Coming in a future edition of this document.

6   Deployment¶

The deployment of the alert distribution and mini-broker described here differs from the prototype described in DMTN-081 [5] and has been revised with significant improvement in design. DMTN-081 describes a system in which groups of filters are deployed in a single container, sharing one copy of the full alert stream and utilizing Python’s multiprocessing module to parallelize the filters. Having a group of filters share a copy of the full alert stream minimizes the number of full streams and the amount of data that needs to be pulled from Kafka, which is necessary given a cap on the network bandwidth available for the system. Additionally, the load of a large number (~10) of consumers, i.e. a large number of full streams, may cause filters to lag and not be able to keep up with the volume and real-time velocity of alerts. (See DMTN-028. [4])

The previous design deploys filters in groups in order to avoid the bandwidth needed to otherwise support the design of a one-stream-per-filter (and therefore 100+ streams) on a single Kafka instance. The major drawback in this deployment is that groups of filters are running within a single container and within a single executed Python script. Filters cannot be isolated to their own environments, and one filter may slow or otherwise affect another.

The design described here attempts to avoid both the bandwidth issue and the issue of shared filter environments by placing components methodically on the hardware available to the system. This design separates each filter into its own Docker container so that filters should have no effect on each other. However, instead of having filter containers deployed on potentially many separate nodes all consuming streams from one Kafka instance running on its own dedicated node, a system of downstream Kafka mirrors are deployed on several nodes from which co-located filters can read streams locally, cutting down on the data throughput between nodes. Filters run in separate Docker containers which are placed on the same node as a Kafka instance mirroring the full stream pulled from the upstream central Kafka hub where alerts are sent. The number of mirrored Kafka instances / groups of filters able to be supported is then determined by the node-to-node available bandwidth, but the filters reading from the downstream local Kafka instances can take advantage of the internal bandwidth of the node on which they run.

The updated deployment plan of the alert distribution system including filtering with the mini-broker is shown in the figure below. Content of the alerts is created in science pipelines, potentially parallelized by CCD. In the alert_stream repo, AlertProducers take as input Python dicts representing the data generated at the end of the prompt processing pipeline. The Python module used for Avro formatting takes these dicts and an Avro schema as input to generate Avro alert packets when alerts are sent to a central Kafka broker, or cluster of Kafka brokers acting as one unit. For testing, a single AlertProducer can be deployed from the alert_stream repo that sends local Avro alert visit files to Kafka. Each Kafka broker in this central hub is deployed on its own node either with Zookeeper on the same node or Zookeeper on a separate node with no other services running. The main Kafka system streams to and feeds downstream community broker consumers and sinks to the alert database.

The central Kafka system feeds the mini-broker filtering system, which is made up of several independent nodes each running a local instance of Kafka and Zookeeper. A MirrorMaker instance also runs on each of these nodes and independently sets up the local mirror of the full alert stream. Filters are deployed in separate Docker containers for each on the same node as the local Kafka hub. The filters read from and write to their local Kafka instance. In testing on AWS, up to 50 filters may run on each node, using m4.4xlarge instances. An m4.4xlarge instance has 14 vCPU, 64 GiB memory, and 2,000 Mbps dedicated bandwidth to its Elastic Block Store SSD storage volume.

The alert_stream code contains a file of filter classes, as described above. In the deployment scripts, a filterStream.py file is included that takes as input the Kafka broker ip to connect to (i.e, the address of the local Kafka instance), the topic name of the full stream of alerts to filter, and the number of the filter in the list of filter classes to run. For example, running a container with the command

python filterStream.py kafka:9092 full-stream 7

will deploy the seventh filter in the list of filter classes. Here the classes included are labeled Filter001 - Filter100, writing to filtered topics of the same name, but these names are flexible.

The local Kafka instances used for filtering feed downstream consumer users. In the deployment scripts, a consumer is started in a separate container for each filtered stream. These consumers are deployed on separate nodes from the filtering nodes. Up to 50 consumers have been tested per node on the same type of instance as the filtering nodes, m4.4xlarge.

Deployment scripts for deploying a full mini-broker configuration (a producer, central Kafka instance, filtering Kafka instances, filters, and consumers) are available in the alert_stream repo. These scripts are specifically for a deployment using Docker Swarm. As input, files listing the node IDs on which to run the different components are needed. The deployment will run 20 filters per node, and 100 total filters are included. Complete instructions for deploying on an AWS CloudFormation cluster are included with the deployment scripts in the swarm directory of alert_stream.

7   Remaining Work¶

There is remaining work particularly in addressing questions around resilience, how users interface with the system, and feasibility of some “desirements.” Below are a few (non-exhaustive) outstanding questions and thoughts.

• How can we make the system resilient to a node going down?

One possibility would be to use Kafka in cluster mode and take advantage of consumer groups. Deploy all Kafka instances as clusters of e.g., 3 brokers across different nodes. For downstream Kafka clusters, put 3 Kafka instances (acting as one unit) + Zookeepers + MirrorMakers on separate nodes. All the MirrorMakers should be configured with the same group ID and should be configured to produce to their local Kafka instance. Using the same group ID should make sure that alerts are not duplicated, i.e., the MirrorMakers pull alerts as in a queue from the central Kafka cluster with no duplicates. Downstream filter containers for the same filters can be deployed across the 3 nodes with the same consumer group IDs set for each filter. For example, a container filtering with Filter001 class can be deployed on all 3 nodes, consuming from the local Kafka instance, all with group ID “Filter001”. The filtered stream should not have duplicate alerts.

• How do we back up alerts?

Containers running Kafka should not use local storage (inside the container) to store alerts but should use volume mounted disk. Storage should be mounted to the /var/lib/kafka/data directory inside the container. If using Kafka in cluster mode, replication to > 1 can be set. The volume mounted disk should also be backed up for as long as data needs to be kept accessible via Kafka.

• How should we organize streams/topics?

It makes sense to create a new topic on a daily basis to make it straightforward for downstream consumers to listen to a night’s worth of data, separate data of interest, and not overwhelm consumers who want to, e.g., replay a night from last week without reprocessing all alerts available since then. Daily topics also make expiring nights of data straightforward instead of ending up expiring data somewhere in the middle of the night.

• For how long should we persist streams?

This is also partially a policy question. The default setting in Kafka is to persist data for one week, so topics older than one week could be removed. (The topics will still exist unless deleted, but they will contain no alerts.) Expiration of data can be set by a time limit or a storage cap. The amount of time we will cache / allow “rewindable” access to the alert stream and the number of partitions configured for each topic sets requirements on the sizes and number of disks needed for storage. See DMTN-028 for compute resource recommendations for different scenarios. Some users of Kafka persist streams indefinitely in Kafka, essentially using it as long-term storage, which could be an option for the LSST alert database.

• How/when are new filters added?

As the filtering code is currently written, each filter is defined as a filter class in the lsst/alert/stream/filters.py file. Whenever a filter class is accepted by the system (however filters are generated by users), a filters.py file could be added to a newly generated Docker image using “ADD” in the Dockerfile, or a volume containing the file could be mounted to the appropriate location in a container deployed from a standard image. The second option is likely a better choice to keep from having too many Docker images. Filters should be able to be added at any time during the night and for any night (topic) in Kafka that exists by setting the topic name subscribed to. The filter consumers can be set either to start reading from the beginning of the topic (to rewind to the beginning of that night’s alerts) or from the current (or given) timestamp. It may make sense to set filters to only filter the alerts from that night’s topics and expire filters every day. Long-running filters, e.g., that might be approved to filter over a time period approved by some sort of TAC, could be set to subscribe to topics via topic wildcards. When setting wildcarded topics, note well that Kafka uses Java Regex syntax.

• How do we and science users test filters?

For testing filters, it would be good to have a sandbox with a separate Kafka instance or cluster with test topics. There could be one central Kafka instance/cluster for the whole sandbox. Or users could be able to launch their own containers of small Kafka instance with a producer that loads in a standard set of well-described test data (as in the single node alert_stream deployment instructions) and test their filter containers using their local Kafka system. Something to think about is how large are the test containers allowed to be (what compute resources / memory, etc. are they allocated). One could imagine that the testing sandbox could itself grow large, but it would be good for users to have enough resources to test their filters in the same environment as the production system.