Mark,
Myself and Bill spoke about the Dataset Type in the Broker and
we are all in agreement with you. The DataBroker is now looking cool.
Please please, can someone walk me thru an SML scenario? I will
then relay this to the CA folk.
Martin...
From: Mark D Weitzel [mailto:weitzelm@xxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: 21 August 2007 14:27
To: Mohsin, Jimmy
Cc: Cosmos Dev; Simmonds, Martin; Valentina Popescu
Subject: RE: COSMOS DC: Review of Indexing examples
OK....
So we seem to
be getting some closure on a few things. Here is what I think are the
next set of things for us to do...
1.
Valentina/Hubert: Update the wiki page
http://wiki.eclipse.org/SDMX_Example with our findings/discussion on SDMX.
We've covered a lot of ground here and I think we need to make sure we
capture these thoughts.
2.
Martin/Hubert: Update the wiki page
http://wiki.eclipse.org/COSMOS_Design_197867 with the new broker content,
structure, etc... We need to capture the alignment with SML concepts, the
separation of concerns, query scenarios, and any API updates.
3. We need to
make sure that Jimmy/Joel understand how we reached some of the conclusions
from yesterday's discussion.
4. This will be
a significant rev of the broker. I'd like Jimmy/Martin/Bill to start
posting small (<200LOC) patches to the bugzilla. Hubert and Joel will
review them to make sure they comply with the eclipse legal requirements et.
and then begin to check them in.
5. Joel/Hubert:
We should target Aug 31 for integration of the new broker into the code.
6. Balan: Sept
7 for a new rev of the end to end with this new broker code. We'll need
to review the impact to Sheldon.
Does this plan
for the next few weeks make sense?
-mw
_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Mark Weitzel | STSM | IBM Software Group | Tivoli | Autonomic Computing | (919)
543 0625 | weitzelm@xxxxxxxxxx
"Mohsin,
Jimmy" <Jimmy.Mohsin@xxxxxx>
08/21/07
02:48 AM
|
To
|
"Simmonds,
Martin" <Martin.Simmonds@xxxxxx>, "Valentina Popescu"
<popescu@xxxxxxxxxx>, Mark D Weitzel/Raleigh/IBM@IBMUS
|
cc
|
"Cosmos
Dev" <cosmos-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
|
Subject
|
RE:
COSMOS DC: Review of Indexing examples
|
|
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