Steven,

                I have a couple of questions as I read the spec more closely. Section 3 says that all sub-elements of the <AdvancedFilter> are additive, but I’m not sure if this is exactly what is intended. For example, if I put <Username>Bob</Username> and <Username>Alice</Username> in the filter, I want jobs that are owned by Alice or Bob (not Alice and Bob). I think what we want is to say that sub-elements of different types (e.g. <Username> and <State>) are additive and sub-elements of the same type (e.g. 2 <Username>s) are “ORed”.

For the Username filter, I’m wondering if there are issues in a multi-credential world for which we might want to add some clarification text. For instance, are you interested in the username known to the backend resource or the username used to identify the client to the service? I presume you’d want the former, which can be different than the later. Currently, HPCBP only allows specification of the later (though there is the optional username element in the HPCPApplication). In the future something like the ActivityCredential document might be used to carry the former. Anyway, my question is whether there should be some clarification text saying something about how the client must understand the way in which the service will assign usernames to jobs in order to formulate the correct username string for the filter? The service may do this straight-forwardly by using the same username for both authentication to the web service and to the backend, but the client must understand this through out-of-band means. The other (more complicated) option is to have the service advertize something that tells the client how to construct usernames.

Should we add something about throwing an UnsupportedFeatureFault or InvalidRequestMessageFault if you send in a filter with sub-elements which a service does/can not support? My service, for example, currently uses GUIDs in its activity IDs and so the range-based ID search doesn’t work well there.

Glenn

From: ogsa-hpcp-wg-bounces@ogf.org [mailto:ogsa-hpcp-wg-bounces@ogf.org] On Behalf Of Steven Newhouse
Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2007 2:37 AM
To: ogsa-hpcp-wg@ogf.org
Subject: [ogsa-hpcp-wg] ***SPAM*** HPCBP Advanced Filter extension
Importance: Low

Attached is a first draft of the ‘Advanced Filter’ specification for the HPCBP to reduce the size of the GetFactoryAttributesDocument for large activities and resources lists.

Comments and active discussion welcomed!

Steven