Hi Andrea,
Sorry I just started to have a better read... not exactly good
timing since the meeting starts in a few mins.
I'll put down my questions and comments quickly.
A general question would be should we aim in this UR to have both
storage and compute or should we just cover storage and say we can
combine with compute via aggregate records?
Some more specific Q's and Comments:
7.1
Q - Do you think it would be better to say "StorageSystem" instead
of "Host".
You do in the Example given.
7.2
Q - Can we re-name from "StorageShare" to something like
"StorageSubElement"?
When I hear the word share I get the idea of a certain share of the
storage like I get 50%.
Q- I am not quite sure what you mean with:
"The value should be able to identify the share of the storage
system, given the storage system property"
Could you clarify - again I start to think fractions when I read
this.
7.5
Q - do you really mean "just" that dir - not including any sub
directories?
If you mean no sub-dirs can we explicitly state that.
C - If you do include sub-dirs is there a possibility of the
sub-dirs breaking out of the hierarchy - I mean something equivalent
to a symbolic link.
C - Are there any storage system which don't have this hierarchical
approach?
7.6
I think the Number of files is a really interesting thing to know
but I am not sure if it belongs in the UR
Q - If we just aim to accounting/billing is #files relevant
C - #file is only possible for snapshot URs - if we have a UR which
is formed over a period of time the number of files is hard to
quantify.
I will start on the rest now (or after the meeting).
cheers
johnk
On 05/30/2012 08:18 PM, Andrea Cristofori wrote:
The subject contains obviously a typo. The date should be
31.05.2012.
Andrea
Il 30/05/2012 16:57, Andrea Cristofori ha scritto:
Dear
all,
I have updated the wiki pages regarding the use cases. I have
also updated the document (attached to this email) on the
definition for the UR adding the use cases that we already
agreed.
After having seen the result of the pool I suggest we try to
have our phone meeting tomorrow at 15:00 CET.
If you have some spare minute please have a look at it, in
general please ignore the page layout and the and grammar
mistakes at this point. Just have a look to the content and the
organization of the material so that we can talk about it
tomorrow.
Cheers,
Andrea
Il 16/05/2012 07:15, Ralph Mueller-Pfefferkorn ha scritto:
Hi Andreas,
I'll be available at the 29th.
Regards,
Ralph
Andrea Cristofori wrote on 15.05.2012 17:09:
Dear all,
Today no one was able to join the phone meeting. Next week
some of us
will be in New York and can not attend so I suggest we meet
again in two
weeks, the 29th of May. Jon will not be able to join because
he is
travelling. If other people can not make it I suggest to
further
postpone the phone meeting of 1 or 2 days but not later than
the 1st of
June. This way we will also have time for another phone
meeting before
next OGF.
In the meanwhile I ask you to have a look to the document
that I sent
yesterday and give some comment and suggestion. In the next
days we will
anyway provide updates but the feedback is very important
because in
this way we know if we are moving in the right direction.
Cheers.
Andrea
--
ur-wg mailing list
ur-wg@ogf.org
https://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/ur-wg
--
ur-wg mailing list
ur-wg@ogf.org
https://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/ur-wg
--
ur-wg mailing list
ur-wg@ogf.org
https://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/ur-wg
--
+------------------------------------------------------------+
|Dr. John Alan Kennedy Rechenzentrum Garching (RZG) |
|Mail: jkennedy@rzg.mpg.de Boltzmannstrasse 2 |
|Phone: +49 89 3299 2694 85748 Garching |
|Fax: +49 89 3299 1301 |
+------------------------------------------------------------+