Hi Adrian,
On Sat, Apr 17, 2021 at 7:35 PM Adrian Borucki <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> This sounds more like *remote* AtomSpace, not distributed. This is still
> important for use cases where there is supposed to be a server handling
> multiple clients that send / receive knowledge from it.
> The distributed use case would usually be when you have a compute cluster
> and you want to distribute data and tasks across its units - so for example
> you might have 100 machines there with a sharded AtomSpace and want to make
> a query such that all these shards get analysed and results pooled together
> in the end (a la MapReduce).
> I do not know much about distributed computing myself but there would have
> to be some sort of orchestration process, ideally this would all be
> integrated with modern tools for cluster management like Kubernetes.
>
Per other email, I am providing "mechanism" not "policy". The analogy--
I'm providing a fleet of trucks. What you do with them is up to you. Drive
them between two cities - that's "client-server". You want to distribute
data across a compute cluster? Sure. You can do that too. ("spoke-wheel",
"warehouse distribution center") Want to shard and map-reduce the results?
Yeah. no problem. ("server farm", "scatter gather") Whatever.
I started a git repo for holding policies of this kind. I announced it last
summer on this mailing list: https://github.com/opencog/atomspace-agents --
it got a big collective yawn. Literally, no one cared at all. So I
instantly stopped work on it.
We have a kind-of dysfunctional mode of operation in opencog-land. Everyone
is very eager to provide requirements, to suggest ideas. When those
requirements, ideas show up in code, well, it turns out that no one was
actually interested in using them. Discussions are great, sure; I'd like
to see more discussion. But there also has to be an implicit agreement,
understanding: if what you wanted showed up tomorrow, would you still want
it? Long experience shows the answer is usually "no". People ask for stuff,
and then come back and say "never mind".
(This is one of the primary pitfalls of "requirements gathering" in
software.)
I've been struggling to break out of that mode of operation. I can't say
I've been successful.
-- Linas
--
Patrick: Are they laughing at us?
Sponge Bob: No, Patrick, they are laughing next to us.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"opencog" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/opencog/CAHrUA36ffdJnKYFgAnJ_r3S%2B6bLEYY8Z6WjLFVrNhZvOajky_A%40mail.gmail.com.
