[glue-wg] ComputingService and Endpoints, a point of view

[stephen.burke at stfc.ac.uk]

glue-wg-bounces at ogf.org [mailto:glue-wg-bounces at ogf.org] On
> Behalf Of Florido Paganelli said:
> I favour the 1) as it makes possible to have Endpoints inside a
> ComputingService, that
> would give better readability and clarity to Endpoints which are NOT
> ComputingEndpoints.

What would you propose to do with Share, Resource and Manager? Also, would you allow a ComputingEndpoint to be part of a non-Computing Service?

> What do you think? Which one should we favour?

In LDAP I don't think it makes very much difference. With the current way of doing it you can find all Endpoints which belong to computing services with (objectclass=GLUE2ComputingEndpoint). If you remove the objectclass from a few of them you lose that ability, and I think there is no gain other than a very small reduction in data volume. (If you want to find only the Endpoints which allow job submission you can select on the Capability.)

> I am really annoyed of calling ComputingEndpoint an Endpoint that has
> nothing to do with computing!

As I said before, if it has nothing to do with computing maybe it shouldn't be part of a ComputingService at all.

Stephen

-- 
Scanned by iCritical.