Mailing-List: contact dev-help@airavata.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@airavata.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of danushka.menikkumbura@gmail.com
 designates 209.85.216.53 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: 
 <CAKUcLKbSq6WFhmRJ2mS-rVfsBM5xJvWJgPYUnQ2vUgShY-B65w@mail.gmail.com>
References: 
 <CAF4V=3EYXeeaVQ=-tZWfK074wEKfiGdGKC6VKtPQstmezVdQuw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAKUcLKbSq6WFhmRJ2mS-rVfsBM5xJvWJgPYUnQ2vUgShY-B65w@mail.gmail.com>
From: Danushka Menikkumbura <danushka.menikkumbura@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 5 Mar 2013 09:21:34 +0530
Message-ID: 
 <CAF4V=3Gweys4PA99MdotB7DNTS4jq28XoempmvyoKGs2aWoWuw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Decoupling GFac Providers
To: dev@airavata.apache.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=20cf3074d22cf77dc804d7256411

--20cf3074d22cf77dc804d7256411
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

Amila,

Correct. When you define the class name in your schema definition, it
actually goes into the HostDescriptionType.

Thanks,
Danushka


On Tue, Mar 5, 2013 at 8:44 AM, Amila Jayasekara <thejaka.amila@gmail.com>wrote:

> On Mon, Mar 4, 2013 at 9:56 PM, Danushka Menikkumbura
> <danushka.menikkumbura@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > As we have discussed on a separate thread it is very beneficial to have
> > gfac providers decoupled from the core so that gateway developers can
> write
> > their own providers and seamlessly integrate them with the Airavata
> > runtime. I suggested we have a separate plugin architecture to facilitate
> > that but it looks as if a simple and neat approach would be to enable
> using
> > dynamically loaded providers in the scheduler without having a separate
> > plugin manager to do that.
> >
> > In order to do that, we need to let the scheduler know the
> fully-qualified
> > class names of providers. I suggest we have the provider class name
> defined
> > in the host description.
>
> Hi Danushka,
>
> The provider class name is an implementation detail in GFac. I think
> we should not expose that to API. User does not need to know about
> class names implementing appropriate providers. Therefore I do not
> think HostDescriptor is the right place to put fully qualified class
> name of provider.
>
> Further I believe the fully qualified class name should be associated
> with org.apache.airavata.schemas.gfac.HostDescriptionType.
>
> HostDescriptionType has following derivations;
>
> org.apache.airavata.schemas.gfac.GlobusHostType
> org.apache.airavata.schemas.gfac.Ec2HostType
> org.apache.airavata.schemas.gfac.GsisshHostType
> org.apache.airavata.schemas.gfac.UnicoreHostType
>
> Thanks
> Amila
>
> >
> > WDYT?
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Danushka
>

--20cf3074d22cf77dc804d7256411--