> On May 30, 2015, at 5:32 PM, Shameera Rathnayaka <[email protected]> > wrote: > > Hi Gary, > > I inserted the diagram as image, let me attache it as attachment.
I still see nothing. - Gary > > Thanks, > Shameera. > > On Sat, May 30, 2015 at 5:35 PM, Gary E. Gorbet <[email protected]> wrote: > Shameera, > > On my copy of this email there was no attachment, no following diagram. Would > you please send that attachment or a URL that points to it. > > Thanks, > Gary > > > On May 30, 2015, at 3:55 PM, Shameera Rathnayaka <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > > Hi Devs, > > > > As we are about to release Airavata 0.15( already cut the branch ) we will > > not add any major changes and it is in testing stage. This will give us > > time to discuss and finalize requirements for the next release , it can be > > either 0.16 or 1.0. > > > > > > As per the feedback from our user community, they need more transparent > > view of what Airavata does when they submit an experiment to run a job on > > remote computer resource. Airavata users are science gateway developers, > > they are not only interested in Experiment level and remote Job level > > status changes. They would like to know some degree of transparency about > > pre-processing and post-processing tasks performed by airavata framework, > > before and after Job submission. For example they would like to see which > > task is being executed at particular time, does scp file transferring > > succeed or not. With current Hander architecture, it is not possible to > > Airavata framework to know which handler does what. User can write and > > integrate different kind of handlers and integrate it with the execution > > chain. If Airavata Job submission failed while transferring input file to > > the compute resource. Gateway developer should be able to find the reason > > without any trouble. Current Airavata save the failure reason with > > stracktrace but that is too low level for a gateway developer. > > > > Here we are thinking of replace this static handler architecture with > > dynamic task mechanism. Here framework has different type of tasks, lets > > say for input staging we have SCP , GRIDFTP and HTTP tasks. each task > > clearly know what it need to do and how. When Airavata get an experiment > > with three inputs, one is simple string and other two are SCP and HTTP type > > file transfer inputs. Then Airavata decide to add SCP and GRIDFTP tasks to > > the dynamic task chain. Then add another Job submission task, let's say job > > need to submit using ssh keys then Airavata add SSH job submission task. as > > same add required task for the outputs. Each task has three states > > Processing, Completed, Failed. In case of failure, framework know which > > type of works it was doing or which task failed, is it SCP file transfer > > task or GRIDFTP file transfering task. Then Airavata can provide(show) this > > details to Users by messaging. Please see following diagram to get an idea > > about different level of state transitions. > > > > Yours feedback are highly appreciate. > > > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > Shameera. > > > > > > > -- > Best Regards, > Shameera Rathnayaka. > > email: shameera AT apache.org , shameerainfo AT gmail.com > Blog : http://shameerarathnayaka.blogspot.com/
