| |
| META TOPICPARENT |
name="IvoaGridAndWebServices" |
Discussion of the VOSpace 1.0 specification Document
This is a discussion page for the VOSpace-1.0 service specification document.
This is somewhere where we can post proposals and to enable interested parties to discuss the different versions.
For each version there is a Change request section - please add to this and vote on other suggestions |
|
<
< | |
| |
- 0 if you have no particular preference
|
|
>
> |
- -1 if you think the proposal is useful but needs more work
- -2 if you disagree with the proposal
|
| | |
|
>
> | If you register a -1 or -2 vote, then please add a link to a page outlining your objections or comments. |
| | Details and discussion of implementation plans are here.
Version 0.22
This document was produced as a result of the discussions that have occured since the Victoria Interop meeting.
Change Requests
Allow typing of properties
The current scheme is limited to key-value pairs where the value is
interpreted as a string. A problem with this that some key-values pairs
might be intended to represent other datatypes, e.g. a date or a float,
and without this typing information, it is impossible to check the
validity of the value. It is always possible for a client to add this
information with an xsi:type attribute, e.g.
<property uri="ivo://net.ivoa/properties/date"
xsi:type="xs:dateTime">2006-11-22T18:50:03Z</property>
but this might not be interpreted properly by the browser. However, if
we actually add a type attribute then we can cover this:
<property uri="ivo://net.ivoa/properties/date"
type="xs:dateTime">2006-11-22T18:50:03Z</property>.
The attribute is optional and non-inclusion implies that the datatype is
string. The value of the attribute can either be an XML datatype or a
reference to an XML schema that describes the data structure thus
allowing for more complicated properties such as:
<property uri="ivo://net.ivoa/properties/color" type="myschema.xsd">
<color>
<red>123</red>
<blue>234</blue>
<green>89</green>
</color>
</property>
Votes
|
|
>
> |
|
| |
Rename views to formats
This needs to be renamed to what it actually is, i.e. format(s), since
the current name is universally confusing.
Votes
|
|
>
> |
|
| |
Decoupled data servers
Under the current scheme, it is assumed that there is some communication
channel between the VOSpace and a data server, e.g. a gridftp server, so
that when a pushTo or pullFrom is completed, the data server can notify
the VOSpace service that the transfer has completed. This sort of
activity is particularly necessary when the endpoint is a logical one,
e.g. a one-time-use URL. This design is fine for the cases where we have
implemented the data servers ourselves or have access to the source code
so that we can add the callback; however, what happens when you are
dealing with an off-the-shelf data server where this is not the case or
non-trivial, e.g. the Globus gridftp server.
One solution is to have the client notify the VOSpace when the
transaction is complete (since this really is only a problem for the
asynchronous services) so pushToVoSpace would become:
- Client calls pushToVoSpace(<node>, <transfer>) returns <node> and <transfer> - the latter containing details for the data server
- Client transfers data to data server
- Client notifies VOSpace that transfer has been completed, e.g.
transferComplete(<node>).
There are a couple of problems with this, however: the client has to
call the space twice and might forget to do the notification call and
what happens if the transfer fails or is not done.
An alternate approach is to do the data transfer first of all and then
register the data object with the node including its physical location so pushToVoSpace becomes:
- Client transfer data to data server
- Client registers data with VOSpace: register(, URI of location) returns the registered <node>
This is actually the only transfer method which needs a modification: all the others work fine with decoupled servers. In fact, instead of adding an additional operation, we can modify pushToVoSpace either to have an additional URI argument: pushToVoSpace(<node>, <transfer>, location-uri) or we could just incorporate the location-uri into the transfer so that if the protocol contains an endpoint then that endpoint is interpreted to be the physical location of the data object.
One thing that would be useful is another operation to return the list of (decoupled) data servers (resources in SRB speak) that the VOSpace is using so I would suggest that we add a getDataServers operation.
Votes
|
|
>
> |
| DaveMorris |
-2 |
Current version is enough, full asynch with callbacks is later (see email for details) |
|
| |
See message for rationale of above itemized list:
- make (file)name a mandatory node property
- use pullDataToVOSpace with copyNode and moveNode to operate across stores
- {copy|move}Node to support exception StoreFull
- drop list paging in favor of filtering by property value
Apparently this democratic page accepts votes: Well, obviously I vote in favor of my comments, however, in case of disagreement I'd rather see how to use level 1 as is based on some real scenarios. Markus
Votes
Make the destination of CopyNode and MoveNode a simple uri
The advantage is it simplifies the standard doc (so many restrictions on node) and is much easier for client to use... as does not have to create a node object - simply create a uri for the destination.
Votes
Re-assess what metadata should be returned with various faults
Some faults need to return metadata beyond simply their type to convery meaningful information about exactly what has gone wrong. e.g. for a setDataNodeProperties call could specify several read-only properties amongst a larger number of properties, and the client would not know which were the properties in error without a list being returned in the fault.
Votes
Version 0.21
This document was produced as a result of the discussions that occured at the Victoria Interop meeting.
Changes
VOspace10Spec21Archive
Changes for later versions of VOSpace
Consider adding an optional wildcard matching identifier to parameters for ListNodes
This would allow the client to specifly a subset of the VOSpace to be listed - in effect the behaviour would be similar to the "ls" command in unix, with typical simle shell wildcard semantics.
Reason for change: improved efficiency - if ListNodes always has to list the whole VOSpace then it is a pretty blunt instrument, especially as the number of data objects in the space increases.
Use Case
Suppose that there is a 1.0 VOSpace containing 5000 data items and a workflow step is writing results into the VOSpace using a common prefix. The next step in the workflow wants to process all of the files produced, but only knows the prefix - without wild card matching the whole of the VOSpace needs to be listed to find the files.
-- PaulHarrison 19 Jun 2006
Votes
*Result*: consider for later version
Add a FindNodes operation
This operation would allow a simple search on the VOSpace - the level of functionality would be similar to the unix "find" command.
<--
--> |
