From owner-grdfm-jsdl-wg@mailbouncer.mcs.anl.gov Thu Nov 25 03:35:21 2004 Return-Path: <owner-grdfm-jsdl-wg@mailbouncer.mcs.anl.gov> X-Original-To: grdfm-jsdl-wg@mailbouncer.mcs.anl.gov Delivered-To: grdfm-jsdl-wg@mailbouncer.mcs.anl.gov Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by mailbouncer.mcs.anl.gov (Postfix) with ESMTP id A916412BE4 for <grdfm-jsdl-wg@mailbouncer.mcs.anl.gov>; Thu, 25 Nov 2004 03:35:21 -0600 (CST) Received: from mailbouncer.mcs.anl.gov ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mailbouncer.mcs.anl.gov [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new,

-----Original Message----- From: owner-jsdl-wg@ggf.org [mailto:owner-jsdl-wg@ggf.org] Sent: Thursday, November 25, 2004 02:35 To: owner-jsdl-wg@ggf.org Subject: BOUNCE jsdl-wg@ggf.org: Non-member submission from ["Lukichev, Alexander S" <alexander.s.lukichev@intel.com>] port 10024) with ESMTP id 31473-05 for <grdfm-jsdl-wg@mailbouncer.mcs.anl.gov>; Thu, 25 Nov 2004 03:35:20 -0600 (CST) X-Greylist: delayed 1205 seconds by postgrey-1.16 at mailbouncer.mcs.anl.gov; Thu, 25 Nov 2004 03:35:19 CST Received: from petasus.ims.intel.com (petasus.ims.intel.com [62.118.80.130]) by mailbouncer.mcs.anl.gov (Postfix) with ESMTP id 01CD912BE3 for <jsdl-wg@gridforum.org>; Thu, 25 Nov 2004 03:35:19 -0600 (CST) Received: from mssmsxvs01.ims.intel.com (mssmsxvs01.ims.intel.com [10.125.2.23]) by petasus.ims.intel.com (8.12.9-20030918-01/8.12.9/d: small-solo.mc,v 1.9 2004/01/09 01:01:53 root Exp $) with SMTP id iAP9Ix9w004344 for <jsdl-wg@gridforum.org>; Thu, 25 Nov 2004 09:19:00 GMT Received: from mssmsx331.ccr.corp.intel.com ([10.125.2.16]) by mssmsxvs01.ims.intel.com (SAVSMTP 3.1.2.35) with SMTP id M2004112512151116895 for <jsdl-wg@gridforum.org>; Thu, 25 Nov 2004 12:15:11 +0300 Received: from mssmsx403.ccr.corp.intel.com ([10.125.2.52]) by mssmsx331.ccr.corp.intel.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.0); Thu, 25 Nov 2004 12:15:11 +0300 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5.7226.0 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: application abstraction in JSDL Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2004 12:15:10 +0300 Message-ID: <6EDC9204B3704C4C8522539D5C1185E565095C@mssmsx403.ccr.corp.intel.com> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: application abstraction in JSDL Thread-Index: AcTSz0MQhfLvcUxLQAaSW8PGwRyBSA== From: "Lukichev, Alexander S" <alexander.s.lukichev@intel.com> To: <jsdl-wg@gridforum.org> Cc: "Ratering, Ralf" <ralf.ratering@intel.com>, "Kentemich, Thomas" <thomas.kentemich@intel.com>, "Petrov, Dmitry N" <dmitry.n.petrov@intel.com>, "Odintsov, Igor O" <igor.o.odintsov@intel.com> X-OriginalArrivalTime: 25 Nov 2004 09:15:11.0261 (UTC) FILETIME=[43E8CCD0:01C4D2CF] X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new-20030616-p10 (Debian) at mailbouncer.mcs.anl.gov X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 tagged_above=-1.0 required=5.0 tests= X-Spam-Level: Hi, Our team is currently develops an application that will use JSDL documents as input to invoke jobs in a distributed system. I'd like to comment if possible some aspects of the latest JSDL=20 schema. Currently to describe the job to run you can specify: a) executable name b) arguments c) environment variables This could be not enough configurable because executables can reside at different places on the different systems, arguments can be passed in different ways to close applications on=20 different systems, etc. Thus JSDL contains pretty enough=20 information for locating the suitable server, the located server=20 could fail to run the requested application because of lack of=20 configuration information. We can look at the UNICORE experience and try to configure the particular applications using the following entities: a) fields (i.e. partucular file names, argument values,=20 e.g. "source=3Da.c", "size=3D1234") b) options (i.e. names for common modes of application=20 work; though setting this mode could differ from=20 system to system, e.g. "debug=3Don" results in passing=20 "-g" to some compilers) c) contexts (modes for application invocations, e.g.=20 "profiliration") d) variations (variations of expected results, e.g.=20 "overwrite" for file operations) It would be nice if some kind of such specification (probably with another entities but with the idea of abstraction of application) is described in the JSDL spec. Thanks. Alexander