[SAGA-RG] SAGA Resource Package Comments

[Ole Weidner]

+1 

That has been my argument for a looong time… separation of concerns.

Resources don't necessarily expose a job submission or file transfer endpoint at all, hence job/file handling shouldn't be part of the resource API!

- Ole

On Jan 16, 2013, at 16:46 , Steve Fisher <dr.s.m.fisher at gmail.com> wrote:

> If you create your resource by instantiating an image of a virtual machine then that resource may offer a variety of services. Even if you ask some kind of resource factory for a resource offering services with certain capabilities it may still include other services.
> 
> Steve
> 
> 
> On 16 January 2013 13:47, Andre Merzky <andre at merzky.net> wrote:
> Hi Steve,
> 
> On Wed, Jan 16, 2013 at 2:33 PM, Steve Fisher <dr.s.m.fisher at gmail.com> wrote:
> > Andre,
> >
> > I like the generality that a resource provides services - however I take
> > your point that it does make the users code more verbose. Perhaps
> > getService(capability) would do the trick where capability is the set of
> > capabilites that you require for the service. It provides at most one
> > service.
> 
> While this is indeed more compact and simpler, it is still redundant,
> isn't it?  e.g., a compute resource will only ever offer a job
> service, etc.  If we want to make that less redundant, and to make
> that generic getResource() call useful, we would need to reconsider
> the way we actually obtain resource handles in the first place -- and
> then possibly only have generic resource handles -- is that what you
> envision?  Ole, any opinion on this one?
> 
> Thanks, Andre.
> 
> 
> 
> > Steve
> >
> >
> > On 16 January 2013 12:29, Shantenu Jha <shantenu.jha at rutgers.edu> wrote:
> >>
> >> On 1/16/13 7:13 AM, Andre Merzky wrote:
> >>>
> >>> On Wed, Jan 16, 2013 at 1:01 PM, Ole Weidner <ole.weidner at rutgers.edu>
> >>> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> Why not? I should be able to use a "network resource" to manage my
> >>>> bandwidth
> >>>> reservations / allocations, right?
> >>>
> >>> A network resource is only useful if you can specify what resources it
> >>> connects -- that is one of the uses we had for the resource pool,
> >>> which I think won't exist anymore in the next version.  So, how would
> >>> you specify connectivity?
> >>>
> >> It is still early days in our understanding, but at some stage possibly,
> >> the ability to include
> >> networks as a resource will be important. We have not scoped this out yet,
> >> but
> >> my hope would be that the current design would be "extensible" to
> >> other/novel
> >> resources as eventually needed, whilst retaining simplicity to address the
> >> compute
> >> and storage resources that are well known at this stage.
> >>
> >
> 
> 
> 
> --
> There are only two hard things in Computer Science: cache invalidation
> and naming things.
> 
> -- Phil Karlton
> 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.ogf.org/pipermail/saga-rg/attachments/20130116/39f6388d/attachment.html>