Hi Yasas,

I'm not a expert in XBaya design and use cases but I think Suresh can shed
some light about it. However we no longer use XBaya for workflow
interpretation. So don't get confused with the workflows defined in XBaya
with the description provided in the JIRA ticket. Let's try to make the
concepts clear. We need two levels of Workflows.

1. To run a single experiment of an Application. We call this as a DAG. So
a DAG is statically defined. It can have a set of environment setup tasks,
data staging tasks and a job submission task. For example, a DAG is created
to run a  Gaussian experiment on a compute host
2. To make a chain of Applications. This is what we call an actual
Workflow. In a workflow you can have a Gaussian Experiment running and
followed by a Lammps Experiment. So this is a dynamic workflow. Users can
come up with different combinations of Applications as a workflow

However your claim is true about pausing and restarting workflows. Either
it is a statically defined DAG or a dynamic workflow, we should be able to
do those operations.

I can understand some of the words and terminologies that are in those
resources are confusing and unclear so please feel free to let us know if
you need anything to be clarified.

Thanks
Dimuthu

On Sun, Mar 25, 2018 at 2:45 AM, Yasas Gunarathne <yasasgunarat...@gmail.com
> wrote:

> Hi All,
>
> I have few questions to be clarified regarding the user-defined workflow
> execution in Apache Airavata. Here I am talking about the high level
> workflows that are used to chain together multiple applications. This
> related to the issue - Airavata-2717 [1].
>
> In this [2] documentation it says that, the workflow interpreter that
> worked with XBaya provided an interpreted workflow execution framework
> rather than the compiled workflow execution environments, which allowed the
> users to pause the execution of the workflow as necessary and update the
> DAG’s execution states or even the DAG itself and resume execution.
>
> I want to know the actual requirement of having an interpreted workflow
> execution at this level. Is there any domain level advantage in allowing
> users to modify the order of workflow at runtime?
>
> I think we can have, pause, resume, restart, and stop commands available
> even in a compiled workflow execution environment, as long as we don't need
> to change the workflow.
>
> [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AIRAVATA-2717
> [2] http://airavata.apache.org/architecture/workflow.html
>
> Regards
> --
> *Yasas Gunarathne*
> Undergraduate at Department of Computer Science and Engineering
> Faculty of Engineering - University of Moratuwa Sri Lanka
> LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/yasasgunarathne/> | GitHub
> <https://github.com/yasgun> | Mobile : +94 77 4893616
> <+94%2077%20489%203616>
>

Reply via email to