[
Date Prev][
Date Next][
Thread Prev][
Thread Next][
Date Index][
Thread Index]
[
List Home]
|
Re: [geclipse-dev] Storage vs. Service
|
On Tue, 29 Jan 2008, Mateusz Pabiś wrote:
According to the discussion during our meeting today, we want to decide if
LFC should be in Storage or Service branch of VO.
We have gathered few ideas:
1. keep as it is
pros:
- no effort required
Yes, I love to implement ostrich algorithm. :)
2. create a new branch in Services: Data Access Services
pros:
+ all data access services are clustered in one place
+ it's easy to find LFC endpoint
Not always easy. Try to create dteam VO. :)
There are severals hundreds of services. Even "data services" branch will
not solve the problem, as there is a lot of SRM services.
3. create an entry for LFC in Storage branch
pros:
+ logically consistent (LFC behaves as storage element)
+ easy integration with MountAction
cons:
- large effort changing gEclipse model (not recommended while we're
introducing new middleware)
I cannot understand why it is so difficult. For me it looks that we need
to have new class LFCStorage implementing IStorage. And this object
can be constructed from LFCService and added to "Storage" branch..
I vote for solutions 3 (LFCStorage) + 2 ("Data services" branch)
And I also suggest for each service branch to group services by type.
e.g.
-Some services branch
|- SRM
|- ResourceBroker
|- VOBOX
| |- VOBOX@node1
| |- VOBOX@node2
|-gridice
Regards,
Pawel
