[UR-WG] Next phone meeting on 16th of October at 15:00 CEST

[Andrea Cristofori]

Hi Ralph,

On 10/16/2012 05:00 PM, Ralph Mueller-Pfefferkorn wrote:
> Dear all,
>
> as todays skype call was cancelled due to low participation here my 
> comments per mail:
>
> Site:
> The second sentence is confusing me: "This property should contain a 
> descriptive name of the group of resources which are accounted for in 
> the record."
> It sounds like it means a group of resources at a site and not the 
> site itself.

we meant that a group of resources is in fact a site. Maybe we could 
rephrase it like that: "This property should contain a descriptive name 
of the logical group of resources (that toghether define the site) which 
are accounted for in the record"

>
> Status/ExitStatus:
> Beside the pure status description I see another use case: Was this a 
> useful/valid job for/of the user and thus be accountable? But this 
> would need that - in case of failure - it states if the problem was 
> caused by the application or the resource.
> The ExitStatus is an undefined numerical value - it could be 
> everything and thus hard to interpret except by the resource owner and 
> the user.

Status could be used to intercept status related to the infrastructure 
because it gives information "from the batch queuing system's accounting 
record". ExitStatus depends on the implementation and might have a 
meaning only for the VO/user. The site could filter the records using 
those two values to discard jobs which failed because of problems on the 
infrastructure.


>
> HostType:
> Its a nice to know but I don't see a real use case. In the storage 
> area we have already a description of the storage with StorageMedia, 
> StorageClass.
> In the compute area what should it state? The job ran on a cluster, an 
> SMP machine ...?

This description is meant for the description of the service. We are 
suggesting to use the GLUE values that are proposed here:

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0An1CLx-Ye4OFdDRkV180clZQampoRGwyWVpsdmRicmc#gid=0

for example org.glite.ce.CREAM, org.dcache.storage, etc.


Cheers,
Andrea and Jon




>
> Andrea Cristofori wrote on 11.10.2012 16:44:
>> Dear all,
>>
>> A new updated version of the document can be found at this address:
>>
>> https://redmine.ogf.org/dmsf_files/167?download=
>>
>> What changed compared to yesterday email are the attributes and blocks
>> description in RecordIdentidyBlock, SubjectIdentityBlock and
>> ComputeUsageBlock.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Andrea
>>
>>
>> On 10/10/2012 03:19 PM, Andrea Cristofori wrote:
>>> Dear all,
>>>
>>> Last phone meeting almost no one was available and was cancelled. Next
>>> phone meeting is fixed for next Tuesday, the 16th of October at 15:00
>>> CEST.
>>> Jon and I discussed some of the attribute present on the attribute
>>> matrix and we updated the table. The relevant attribute are those
>>> marked with a question mark.
>>> We just copied the description of the Status and ExitStatus from EMI
>>> CAR 1.0.
>>> You can find the updated document here:
>>>
>>> https://redmine.ogf.org/dmsf_files/161?download=
>>>
>>> In case of further changes before the phone meeting we will send a
>>> notification.
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> Andrea
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
> --
>    ur-wg mailing list
>    ur-wg at ogf.org
>    https://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/ur-wg


-- 
Andrea Cristofori
INFN-CNAF
Viale Berti Pichat 6/2
40127 Bologna
Italy
Tel. : +39-051-6092920
Skype: andrea-cnaf

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.ogf.org/pipermail/ur-wg/attachments/20121018/8b25a8f4/attachment.html>