airavata-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Pamidighantam, Sudhakar" <>
Subject Re: Gap Analysis between GridChem Middleware and Airavata
Date Fri, 12 Jun 2015 20:57:45 GMT
Supun and Dimuthu:

Thanks very much for the very nice comparative analysis. This reminds me of the happy  old
days when we went about establishing this model.
Also we need to see if we need to use a combined model (part GridChem middleware services
and part Airavata)  or to implement the
requirements in Airavatafor bringing GridChem to quick production in Airavata context. Is
there a way to estimate the effort required in either case.


On Jun 12, 2015, at 3:31 PM, Supun Nakandala <<>>

Hi All,

I did analyse the gridchem middleware service's (GMS) user and project organisation (virtual
organisation) functionality. My analysis is based on the data models and data organization.
I have attached the data model relating to the above functionality here with. I would like
to summarize some of the VO features in gridchem here

1. Unlike Airavata GMS maintains more detailed user information. For Airavata we don't need
to maintain such detailed information as we have external userstore which maintains these
data and does the authentication and authorization work. User in GMS can have one of three
privilege levels (PI, Admin, User)

2. There is a notion of user preferences in GMS. This is something that we can think and decide
whether to add or not to Airavata

3. Similar to Airavata GMS also has the notion of Project. But the project model in GMS contains
more details than Airavata. It has fields like sponsorName, projectStatus, service units awarded,
service units requested etc..

4. GMS contains job level scheduling configuration information in the Project model (e.g CPUs
per job, disGB per job). But I think keeping them in the project level is not a good idea
as different jobs may need different configuration. In Airavata we keep those information
per Experiment (in new models per Process).

5. Similar to Airavata it is possible to add users to projects.

6. GMS treats Applications (Software) and Computational Resources as Resources. Unlike in
Airavata these resources can be assigned to projects and to users to use in a particular project(ternary
relation). This way GMS has implemented access controlling on Applications and CRs.

7. GMS also has features like blacklisting a particular user to user an application(Software),
renewal of projects etc.. which we don't have in Airavata.

The execution unit data model in GMS is Job (Similar to Experiment in Airavata) and is associated
with the Project model. Data models relating to Job and other related entities are not shown
in the attached document.


On Fri, Jun 5, 2015 at 9:15 AM, DImuthu Upeksha <<>>
Hi All,

Supun and myself are working on comparing API level similarities and dissimilarities of GridChem
middleware services and Airavata SDK. Current analysis can be found from [1]. Currently most
of the functionalities of GridChem middleware has been mentioned under separate categories.


W.Dimuthu Upeksha
Department of Computer Science And Engineering
University of Moratuwa, Sri Lanka

Thank you
Supun Nakandala
Dept. Computer Science and Engineering
University of Moratuwa

View raw message