OGSA F2F Meeting 17 =================== Wednesday afternoon, 14 March 2007 Oracle * Data grid usecases (Jay, DaveB, 1:30-3pm) ** Participants Mark Morgan Jay Unger Steve McGough Hiro Kishimoto Fred Maciel Alan Luniewski Ellen Stokes Andrew Grimshaw Chris Kantarjiev Michel Drescher Andreas Savva Dial in: Chris Smith, Dave Berry Minutes: Andreas Savva - Long standing action; not much progress - Jay has talked with some projects (condor etc) - Platform has some support but not pre-configured; for most users making sure that data is pre-placed is good enough - Univa has published something related (data movement orchestrator); eventually might be on-the-fly, dynamically orchestrated replication. - Done for commercial entities; not just for escience applications - Current practice is not very advanced - Data as first class resource - Better to go back to basics; how people like to think about these entities, what I/O paradigms have served community and are well accepted. - Replication might be under the covers and transparent - Access method for applications: what they already use - Method varies depending on application; need to have those different approaches - How is advertisement done and what criteria are used to narrow down data sets published? - How many entities do you publish? All or some subset, and how that subset is determined? Concern with the size of this space, and RNS applicability or not. - How is the search space (for a evaluating xquery requirement) determined - Is this applicable for data? If there is a reference (e.g., EPR) to the needed data is it enough? - Recapitulated that state of the art is to pre-place data and assume it is there; only a small number of users actually do anything more refined like advertising. - Job submission as an example: how should 'files' or 'data' be modeled. Is it just a requirement on a resource or something different (more data specific). What information is needed by the scheduler to make sure that something is available; and whether there is an objective to optimize. - Describe requirements, e.g., what files are required. How the requirements are satisfied depends on the state of the system, e.g., what might already be available locally and the capabilities of the 'container' - There are a number of requirements on other areas and those requirements would also have to be documented. This action is closed. AI-0314pm-a: Jay (and Andrew) to write up a short paper describing the resolution of this action * QoS discussion (Steve, Andrew, 3:15-5pm) ** Participants Mark Morgan Jay Unger Steve McGough Hiro Kishimoto Fred Maciel Alan Luniewski Ellen Stokes Andrew Grimshaw Chris Kantarjiev Michel Drescher Andreas Savva Dave Snelling Donal Fellows Dial in: Fred Brisard Minutes: Andreas Savva - Andrew's presentation; no definition, just trying to identify what it is that it means. Seems closer to what SLA is used for, rather than QoX - Continuous vs discrete approach; providing a set of discrete options - Need to factor in cost otherwise everyone would ask for maximum values of all dimensions - WS-Agreement shortcomings (just a protocol; need terms) and problem of not having negotiation - Need for terms to describe SLAs, as a start. Not necessarily within OGSA-WG. A workshop style might be one idea. - Andrew volunteered to arrange a session at OGF20 to discuss this topic. NextGRID is also doing some work in this area. AI-0314pm-b: Andrew will contact stakeholders with a view to arranging a session at OGF20, probably as an ad-hoc BOF. Choose a specific topic in the SLA space (terms on response time, cost, availability, dependability) that can be applied to BES and ByteIO. This could later lead to a workshop to define a broader set of terms.