There is nothing attached to my e-mail. You can post a URL.

-b.
> Hi Gary,
>
> I inserted the diagram as image, let me attache it as attachment.
>
> 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/
>


-- 
Borries Demeler, Ph.D.
Associate Professor
The University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio
Dept. of Biochemistry
Email: [email protected]

Reply via email to