Return-Path: X-Original-To: apmail-airavata-dev-archive@www.apache.org Delivered-To: apmail-airavata-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 020F111AB4 for ; Wed, 27 Aug 2014 19:47:57 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 52146 invoked by uid 500); 27 Aug 2014 19:47:56 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-airavata-dev-archive@airavata.apache.org Received: (qmail 52092 invoked by uid 500); 27 Aug 2014 19:47:56 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@airavata.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: dev@airavata.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list dev@airavata.apache.org Received: (qmail 52081 invoked by uid 99); 27 Aug 2014 19:47:56 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (140.211.11.136) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 27 Aug 2014 19:47:56 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.3 required=5.0 tests=RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: local policy) Received: from [129.79.1.194] (HELO hartman.uits.indiana.edu) (129.79.1.194) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 27 Aug 2014 19:47:48 +0000 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.04,413,1406606400"; d="scan'208";a="168272237" Received: from mssg-relay.indiana.edu ([129.79.1.73]) by irpt-internal-relay.indiana.edu with ESMTP; 27 Aug 2014 15:47:20 -0400 Received: from hartman.uits.indiana.edu (belushi.uits.indiana.edu [129.79.1.188]) by mssg-relay.indiana.edu (8.14.7/8.14.4/IU Messaging Team) with ESMTP id s7RJlK4F019150 for ; Wed, 27 Aug 2014 15:47:20 -0400 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.04,413,1406606400"; d="scan'208";a="168337788" Received: from candy.uits.indiana.edu (HELO mail-relay.iu.edu) ([129.79.1.201]) by irpt-internal-relay.indiana.edu with ESMTP; 27 Aug 2014 15:47:21 -0400 Received: from 149-160-240-233.dhcp-bl.indiana.edu (149-160-240-233.dhcp-bl.indiana.edu [149.160.240.233]) (authenticated bits=0) by mail-relay.iu.edu (8.14.7/8.14.4/IU Messaging Team) with ESMTP id s7RJlJiq015203 for ; Wed, 27 Aug 2014 15:47:20 -0400 Message-ID: <53FE35C7.7080905@iu.edu> Date: Wed, 27 Aug 2014 15:47:19 -0400 From: Marlon Pierce User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.9; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: dev@airavata.apache.org Subject: Re: Restricting editing and launching FAILED experiments References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org While it doesn't seem to be a problem relaunching a failed experiment, I like the idea of just cloning and creating a new one. This eliminates some places where things can go wrong and may make it less confusing to track things through logs and the registry. Marlon On 8/27/14, 3:41 PM, Saminda Wijeratne wrote: > Speaking from the experience of using CIPRES science gateway, they have > simplified user options for a task (aka an experiment) that has being > launched/completed/failed in to just 2 choices. > 1. Delete Task (Cancel first if its still running) > 2. Clone Task > IMO from a gateway users POV this simplification is acceptable since to me > it seems users are happy with it. However we have to understand that it's > due to design decision made by the gateway portal designers/developers. > i.e. If the developer thinks the community would benefit from it they would > incorporate much broader range of choices for a task. > eg: > Pause > Resume (resume paused or failed task) > Edit > Retry (start from the beginning) > etc. > Either the developer will have to implement this additional server side > features or rely on a middleware service (aka Airavata) to do it for them. > In either case I agree with Eroma that users should be able to see a record > of actions performed on the task (such as when it was > started/paused/retried, corresponding execution data etc.) > > > On Mon, Aug 25, 2014 at 3:58 PM, Eroma Abeysinghe < > eroma.abeysinghe@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Hi Devs, >> >> Please share your views on below. In Airavata currently we can edit and >> launch FAILED experiments; option is there through PHP gateway. >> >> Editing and launching FAILED experiments through PHP reference gateway >> Currently we can edit and launch experiments with FAILED state. This can >> create complications which can be eliminated by blocking editing and >> launching FAILED experiments. >> >> If we allow editing and launch for FAILED; then we need to have a way of >> displaying results of every attempt made on the experiment, store the >> partial outputs, error messages and job info on each try. etc.... >> >> User can easily clone a failed experiment and create a new experiment. >> So WDYT? shall we restrict Edit and launch for FAILED experiments? >> >> >> -- >> Thank You, >> Best Regards, >> Eroma >>