Dear Paul,
In any case, if only Physical Shares are intended to be used for installed capacity, this should be the ones used by sites who may want to rely on the BDII for installed capacities, right?
Yes, that's exactly right!
OK, so why do you need the ViewID? Just tell the site interested in using the BDII to calculate installed capacities to use the Physical Shares. As you say, Physical shares do not publish the Tag attribute, so it's easy to know which ones they are.
The problem is GLUE 2.0 has no way for me to say "these shares are different from those ones", or "these shares are the ones to use for storage accounting".
Well, as I said before, Physical Shares are the ones to be used for the installed capacity and there is a way to know whether a share is SRM or Physical. So where is the problem?
I had to smile inwardly here ... Yes, there was an effort, starting around five years ago, in precisely this direction:
https://twiki.cern.ch/twiki/pub/LCG/WLCGCommonComputingReadinessChallen ges/WLCG_GlueSchemaUsage-1.8.pdf
That document is for GLUE 1.3. We don't have something similar for GLUE 2.0. And I can tell you WLCG is not interested in getting installed capacities correctly published in the BDII. They have given up and they have the REBUS interface instead.
It seems at least one site wishes to make use of these numbers and to automate the process. I don't think we should give up, just because the problem isn't solved yet.
I wouldn't introduce this change in the schema only because one site has asked for it. Moreover, and after your answer to Stephan (which by the way it's a bit confusing) there are ways for that site to calculate the installed capacity using the current attributes. Regards, Maria