airavata-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Vijayendra Grampurohit <vijayendra....@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Airavata GSoC 2013 Master Project
Date Thu, 25 Apr 2013 20:39:00 GMT
Hi

1] Currently the workflow description has the graph representation form
 xbaya .
The data for the Workflow Inputs come from the Registry .This data is in
wsdl form which is stored
in the Registry.
There is also some metadata associated with wsdl . So that the client which
has to bind the input values can use it.

As we are discussing in the line of developing a  browser based application.
For constructing workflow we can make use of below graph library's
http://jsplumbtoolkit.com/jquery/demo.html
http://raphaeljs.com/
In our project( Openshift workflows) we had used jsplumb library
which worked well with Angularjs .

There are many more graph libraries which also can be explored.

2] Currently the data that is stored in Registry is of the form wsdl.
The workflow will use the data stored in the Registry .
For the new workflow as there is a discussion going on what kind of data
are we
going to store in registry   (i.e wsdl or JSON ). This can be worked
accordingly.

3] Monitoring tool : I am thinking in terms of a
browser plugin or a simple java script based web based monitoring which
will
notify users on workflow progress in real time.
This can be developed as a separate module .
The Monitoring tool subscribes to a pre-specified topic to which
Workflow Engine and GFac are publishing status notifications.Then the
monitoring
tool translates these messages and shows to to the user in the front end.
Please see the image inserted.

[image: Inline image 1]

What we can also do , When user is executing a very large workflow
with hundreds of variables and doesn't want to track every thing, Then  we
can have a option to
which allows customization in the monitoring tool .
My point is  we can have  features in which user can monitor
the variables or data he wants.

Please correct me if I am wrong any where.

Regards
Vijayendra





On Thu, Apr 25, 2013 at 7:08 PM, Suresh Marru <smarru@apache.org> wrote:

> On Apr 23, 2013, at 8:01 AM, Suresh Marru <smarru@apache.org> wrote:
>
> > Great discussion Shameera & Subho.
> >
> > Looks like you guys have a fair idea on what needs to be done, as you
> both state, a week or two into GSOC, you can narrow down on design and
> specifications and so forth. Given there are multiple students tackling
> these issues collectively, if there are hard decisions to make, I would
> suggest to try two approaches in parallel and quickly pick one after a
> proof of concept.
>
> Can you all discuss the workflow composition strategies related to the
> data model the same way we discussed application descriptions?
>
> We need to decompose the master project into smaller, well aligned
> projects this weekend. So please start posting ideas on how to sub-divide
> the projects.
>
> Suresh
>
> >
> > Suresh
> >
> > On Apr 23, 2013, at 3:43 AM, Subho Banerjee <subs.zero@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Well exactly, as long as you can define standard way of communication.
> That
> >> is, you can define in advance what should be a string, array and what
> >> should be a integer etc. We have no problem.
> >>
> >> So, when you look at problems, with JSON <-> XML or the other way round,
> >> they talk of the very general case (where you no nothing about the data
> you
> >> are converting other than it is valid XML/JSON). There are a myriad of
> >> problems in that case, which you pointed out.
> >>
> >> But when there is standard, there is only one way of doing things, and
> not
> >> several. I think that is the way forward. So what I am proposing is
> maybe
> >> we all discuss and define this standard within the first week of GSoC
> >> starting and then actually move into coding. So as long as we work with
> the
> >> presumption that this will be done, we really dont have to worry a lot
> >> about this.
> >>
> >> Cheers,
> >> Subho.
> >>
> >>
> >> On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 11:52 AM, Shameera Rathnayaka <
> >> shameerainfo@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Hi,
> >>>
> >>> On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 2:25 AM, Subho Banerjee <subs.zero@gmail.com>
> >>> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> Some of these problems are very specific to what the XML is
> >>> representing,
> >>>> it might not be an actual problem in Airavata,
> >>>> maybe some one more experienced with the codebase can point this out.
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> All issues pointed out in the paper is not directly valid to our
> >>> conversion, I didn't list the issues actually need to address in this
> case
> >>> because thought it is worth to read that introduction part which
> explain
> >>> the all the issues we have with this conversion and give us a solid
> >>> background of that.
> >>>
> >>>>  1. Anonymous values, Arrays, Implicit Typing, Character sets -- I
> >>> really
> >>>>  dont see these as problems, as long as you can agree that all parts
> of
> >>>>  airavata will treat the JSON in a standard (probably we have to
> define
> >>>>  this) way.
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> The issue with JSON array only comes when we try to convert XML to
> JSON not
> >>> the other way. If we map with JSON, inputparameters and
> outputparameters in
> >>> the ServiceDescription.xsd will map with JSON Arrays. Therefore we
> need to
> >>> solve this issue.
> >>>
> >>> JSON XML JSON
> >>> {"inputs":["test"]} --> <inputs>test<inputs>  --> {"inputs":["test"]}
>   //
> >>> correct one
> >>>                          --> {"inputs":"test"}     // incorrect one
> >>>
> >>> 2. Namespaces, Processing Instructions -- Is this required?
> >>>
> >>>>  Are separate namespaces used in Airavata? Only place I can see this
> >>>> being
> >>>>  used is probably in the WSDL, but if we can agree on another way
> >>>>  of communicating registered applications' I/O parameters to the front
> >>>> end
> >>>>  (JSON based), then maybe we can work around this (minor) problem. Are
> >>>>  custom processing instructions to the Xbaya XML parse even used?
> >>>>  3. Attributes -- Again, this can be fixed easily
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> Yes,attributes convertion will not be a big issues we can solve it. As
> >>> Lahiru mentioned in Hangout session namesapce handling is not a big
> issue
> >>> with Airavata.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>
> >>>> <array name="abc">
> >>>>    <element>1</element>
> >>>>    <element>2</element>
> >>>>    <element>3</element>
> >>>>    <element>4</element>
> >>>> </array>
> >>>>
> >>>> Can become
> >>>>
> >>>> {
> >>>>
> >>>>   abc : ['1', '2', '3', '4']
> >>>>
> >>>> }
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> With this example it show us we need to change the XML message format
> of
> >>> server side, which require to change the all schemas, If we are going
> to
> >>> change the schemas then we need to change the way it process it in
> Ariavara
> >>> core. We have dropped our initial major requirement, which is keep the
> >>> Airavata Server side as it is.
> >>>
> >>> with this conversion we only deal with json strings, yes we can send
> JSON
> >>> request with other formats supported by JSON like boolen, null, Number
> >>> etc.. But there is no way to get the same JSON from XML as XML only
> deal
> >>> only with Strings. I think it is good if we can consume a this features
> >>> with JSON.
> >>>
> >>> let say i need to send a integer or float to the server using JSON then
> >>> proper way is to send {"<name>":123.45} this will works fine but
> problem is
> >>> how we get the same output ?
> >>>
> >>> Thanks,
> >>> Shameera.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Cheers,
> >>>> Subho.
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>> Best Regards,
> >>> Shameera Rathnayaka.
> >>>
> >>> Blog : http://shameerarathnayaka.blogspot.com/
> >>>
> >
>
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/related (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message