Mark,
1. Agree with Martin on his comment “with the structure of keysets and dataset
types is where I see this going”
2. I agree 100000% percent with Valentina’s
statement “SDMX is meant to be used for
exchanging statistical data and any other usage of it is accidental and not
meant to from a spec”. I think for a VERY long time, SDMX was seen as THE mechanism for ALL
our use cases. As I have stated in past meetings numerous
times, we have MANY high-value use cases that shuttle a VERY small amount of
data around. Using SDMX to fulfill these cases would have made no sense whatsoever.
3. That said, we should certainly use SDMX
for what is meant to be used for, i.e. for managing statistical data. We
have a FEW use cases in this space as well. However, if I had my way, I
would implement some SIMPLE use cases first where I would demonstrate the
simpler (non-SDMX) use cases first….
4. Type support based registration makes
a LOT of sense…
Thanks,
Jimmy Mohsin
+1-609-635-1703
From: Simmonds, Martin
Sent: Tuesday, August 21, 2007
1:59 AM
To: Valentina Popescu; Mark D
Weitzel
Cc: Mohsin,
Jimmy
Subject: RE: COSMOS DC: Review of
Indexing examples
I agree that the
Data Broker registration based on SML/CML is a better alternative. I don’t
want to see SDMX mentioned in all of this, pure xml with the structure of
keysets and dataset types is where I see this going.
I am going to show
Bill Muldoon the Cosmos Web Gui later today, and I think that by the end of
today we can agree on what is in the Data Broker.
I had asked a few
weeks ago for someone to go over SML. Is it possible that we could go
over a scenario where SML is used? This will speed up things if we have a
good understanding. As yet I don’t see where CA’s use cases
would use SML, I do most definitely see how CML should be used for the Dataset
Type. That said, how do you ensure we are using CML? Is this an I6
possibility or after?
Martin...
From: Valentina
Popescu [mailto:popescu@xxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: 21 August 2007 05:12
To: Mark D Weitzel
Cc: Mohsin,
Jimmy; Simmonds, Martin
Subject: RE: COSMOS DC: Review of
Indexing examples
Sorry I couldn't make today's meeting, I have a full day
event for Mon-Wend this week
I have to agree with Mark on the SDMX proposal. I had the
to-do for mapping SDMX to the SML Data Center types so I investigated more the
SDMX specifications and looked at SDMX samples and proposed approaches
My conclusion
- SDMX is meant to be used for exchanging statistical data
and any other usage of it is accidental and not meant to from a spec definition
- If the only purpose of using SDMX with the Data Broker is
to make use of the keysets support and data-type separation, than we just
complicate unnecessarily the entire usecase. There are other ways, much cleaner
and easier to get to the same support ( such as pure xml .. )
- since we are building our scenarios around a Data Center
solution and the project goal is to support and align with SML and SML based
resources, I would rather incline to use the Data Center sample in COSMOS for
the type support registration. This also has the benefit that is SML enabled
and will eventually become CML; a Data Broker registration based on SML/CML is
probably something that should be considered as a better alternative
Thank you,
Valentina Popescu
IBM Toronto Labs
Phone: (905)413-2412 (tie-line 969)
Fax: (905) 413-4850
Mark D Weitzel/Raleigh/IBM@IBMUS
08/20/2007
09:21 AM
|
To
|
"Simmonds, Martin"
<Martin.Simmonds@xxxxxx>
|
cc
|
"Mohsin, Jimmy"
<Jimmy.Mohsin@xxxxxx>, Valentina Popescu/Toronto/IBM@IBMCA
|
Subject
|
RE: COSMOS DC: Review of Indexing examplesLink
|
|
Martin,
My intent is to keep the data broker as simple as possible.
I agree that it's just a "yellow pages" kind of thing.
What I would like to do is keep all the information inside
of COSMOS consistent with itself. Here's what we got right now....
Inside the broker, we have SDMX
Inside our repository, we have SML
It seems that we all agree on the following:
* We don't want to use all of SDMX, only this interesting
aspect around the way data is described.
* We like the fact the kind/type of data is kept distinct
from the source of the data
From my perspective, what I was trying to do was to
determine if there was a way we could use the constructs that we already have
defined in SML as way to achieve the same thing. The thinking here is
that if we can use the same concepts from SML to have the indexes, then the
things in our repository (ultimately CML models) will be able to line up
nicely. I'm hoping we can simplify the COSMOS design by reducing our
dependency on another specification. We can use today's call to glean the
true requirements on the broker and figure out if this is possible.
BTW... Hubert should have asked you guys to start attaching
code to the enhancement request. We can coordinate with him today, but we
should be able to start with some small patches that we can begin to work
together on.
other comments in line
<mdw>
like this...
</mdw>
_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Mark Weitzel | STSM | IBM Software Group | Tivoli | Autonomic Computing | (919) 543 0625
| weitzelm@xxxxxxxxxx
"Simmonds,
Martin" <Martin.Simmonds@xxxxxx>
08/20/07
08:24 AM
|
To
|
Mark D Weitzel/Raleigh/IBM@IBMUS
|
cc
|
"Mohsin, Jimmy"
<Jimmy.Mohsin@xxxxxx>
|
Subject
|
RE: COSMOS DC: Review of Indexing examples
|
|
Thanks Mark,
I don’t remember
seeing this, it must have got lost in the mail J
Mark, On that last
long long meeting I got cut off, and you were starting to talk about SML and
facets, when I got back. I was not sure where that came from, but I am
guessing the following (or maybe its just
another Simmonds idea J) :
The Data Broker is a yellow pages that stores a KeySet Name (Classification)
and EPR to the DM.
<mdw>
agree
</mdw>
This is how CA sees the use of it, yet others seem to want to use the
databroker as more than just this. They see the Databroker as storing
some kind of metadata that you can query via Xpath from the Client.
<mdw>
I think we've been confusing/blending a
number of responsibilities. We need absolute clarity on what the broker
does and what it interacts with. I want this to be as simple as possible.
</mdw>
I am guessing that the Keyset Name/Epr could be a reference to an
‘entry’ in the SML repository, that could contain this extra
metadata.
<mdw>
In my head the "keyset" points
to an EPR. The EPR is an endpoint for an MDR.
That's the only thing the broker does.
So i'd write you example as....
"The keyset points to an EPR. The EPR
is the CMDBf MDR interface for the SML repository. CMDBf queries can be
used against this MDR interface to obtain extra metadata.
</mdw>
It would mean that CA uses the DataBroker from a client in the way it has been
, and the other users would get their Client to get all the data managers via
the Data Broker, and to read the metadata from the SML repository keyed on
keyset name and epr.
<mdw>
I'm confused. Can you provide more
details on this interaction. Maybe I'm not sure how CA is using the
broker now.
</mdw>
That would mean the Data Manager would have to register with the DataBroker and
puts its Metadata into the SML repository.
<mdw>
No. I think the Data Manager (a.k.a.
MDR)
1) Finds the Data Broker it is supposed to
use from it's Management Domain.
2) Registers with the Data Broker that it
is available.
3) The Data Broker and the Data Manager
"talk to each other nicely" to exchange the necessary metadata about
itself (e.g. keysets).
That's it.
(btw... I think steps 2 & 3 are
similar to CMDBf registration, but I don't want to go there yet b/c I'd like to
get a simple case working first....)
</mdw>
The client would then be able to use Xpath to query against the metadata that
it gets out of the SML Repository.
<mdw>
The client can ask the data broker for
MDRs (a.k.a. Data Managers) that manage. This query will be XPath (?).
It get's back an EPR to an MDR.
</mdw>
Is this way off base?
<mdw>
Not sure... I think we are trying to get
to the same thing here, but maybe I've thrown a Yorker.
P.S. "way off base"
I believe this is a baseball _expression_. Being that you are from the UK, I'd expect,
either a) futball (a.k.a. soccer) reference or b) cricket reference.
</mdw>
Martin...
From: Mark
D Weitzel [mailto:weitzelm@xxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: 20 August 2007 13:10
To: Simmonds, Martin
Subject: Fw: COSMOS DC: Review of Indexing examples
You should have seen this invite fly by last week...
-mw
_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Mark Weitzel | STSM | IBM Software Group | Tivoli | Autonomic Computing | (919) 543 0625
| weitzelm@xxxxxxxxxx
----- Forwarded by Mark D Weitzel/Raleigh/IBM on 08/20/07 08:09 AM -----
|
Subject
|
COSMOS DC:
Review of Indexing examples
|
|
When
|
|
Mon 08/20/2007
|
10:00 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mon 08/20/2007
|
12:00 PM
|
|
Invitees
|
Invited
|
The following invitees have been
invited
|
Required (to)
|
cosmos-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
|
|
|
|
|
|
Chair
|
Mark D
Weitzel/Raleigh/IBM
|
|
Where
|
Location
|
Audio
Conference Access Numbers
USA:
1-877-421-0033 or 770-615-1250
Passcode: 267667
|
Reserved
|
No rooms or resources have been
reserved
|
|
|
|
Review the "low hanging fruit" of action items that we can do.
SDMX index Examples
Mapping to SML of SDMX