This is a static archive of the previous Open Grid Forum GridForge content management system saved from host forge.ogf.org file /sf/go/artf3415?nav=1 at Thu, 03 Nov 2022 16:04:33 GMT SourceForge : artf3415: (1542) Job Submission Description Language (JSDL) 1.0

Project Home

Tracker

Documents

Tasks

Source Code

Discussions

File Releases

Wiki

Project Admin
Search Tracker
Project: Editor     Trackers > Published > View Artifact
Artifact artf3415 : (1542) Job Submission Description Language (JSDL) 1.0
Tracker: Published
Title: (1542) Job Submission Description Language (JSDL) 1.0
Description:
This specification is the product of the JSDL-WG.

JSDL 1.0 defines a language for describing the requirements of computational jobs for submission. XML schemas are 
included..
Submitted By: Andreas Savva
Submitted On: 06/15/2005 12:02 AM EST
Last Modified: 05/06/2007 4:46 AM EDT
Closed: 04/22/2006 6:45 PM EDT

Status / Comments Change Log Associations Attachments (5)  
Status  
Group: *
Status:* Closed
Category: *
Customer: *
Priority: * 0
Assigned To: * None
Reported in Release: *
Fixed in Release: *
Estimated Hours: * 0
Actual Hours: * 0
resolution: *
Comments
Greg Newby: 05/06/2007 4:46 AM EDT
  Action: Update
resolution changed from PUBLISHED to none (no value)
Greg Newby: 04/22/2006 6:45 PM EDT
  Comment:
Mass Update
  Action: Update
artifact_status changed from Open to Closed
close_date changed from - to 2006-04-22 14:45:38
resolution changed from <None> to PUBLISHED
Greg Newby: 03/27/2006 2:00 PM EST
  Action: Update
artifact_status changed from Closed to Open
Category changed from <None> to Recommendations Track
group_artifact_id changed from Submit GGF Draft to Published
Priority changed from 5 to -
Joel Replogle: 03/27/2006 11:04 AM EST
  Comment:
Reloaded corrected document to GGF web site on 27 March, 2006.
  Action: Update
Joel Replogle: 03/27/2006 11:04 AM EST
  Action: Update
artifact_status changed from ready to publish to Closed
assigned_to changed from 9357 to 100
close_date changed from - to 2006-03-27 11:04:44
Priority changed from 1 to 5
Greg Newby: 03/26/2006 9:17 PM EST
  Action: Update
artifact_status changed from Final Editor Review to ready to publish
Andreas Savva: 02/28/2006 10:24 PM EST
  Comment:
I have checked the typo fix.
Thanks!
Andreas
  Action: Update
Greg Newby: 02/28/2006 4:10 PM EST
  Action: Update
artifact_status changed from Open to Final Editor Review
Greg Newby: 02/28/2006 4:03 PM EST
  Action: Update
artifact_status changed from Closed to Open
group_artifact_id changed from Published to Submit GGF Draft
resolution changed from PUBLISHED to <None>
Greg Newby: 02/28/2006 4:02 PM EST
  Comment:
small typo "tmp" to "temporary" fixed in pp. 23-24.
  Action: Update
Greg Newby: 02/28/2006 4:02 PM EST
  Attachment: GFD-R.056.fixed.doc (652 KB)
  Action: Update
File added set to 779: GFD-R.056.fixed.doc
assigned_to changed from 100 to 9357
Priority changed from - to 1
resolution changed from PUBLISHED to Fixed
Greg Newby: 02/13/2006 2:55 AM EST
  Comment:
Mass Update
  Action: Update
resolution changed from <None> to PUBLISHED
Greg Newby: 12/11/2005 10:48 PM EST
  Comment:
Mass Update
  Action: Update
artifact_status changed from Open to Closed
close_date changed from - to 2005-12-11 18:48:55
Greg Newby: 11/28/2005 9:17 PM EST
  Action: Update
artifact_group changed from Compute to <None>
artifact_status changed from Closed to Open
Category changed from Recommendations Track to <None>
group_artifact_id changed from Submit GGF Draft to Published
Priority changed from 5 to -
resolution changed from Published to <None>
Joel Replogle: 11/27/2005 3:58 PM EST
  Comment:
Published as GFD.56 27 November, 2005.
  Action: Update
Joel Replogle: 11/27/2005 3:58 PM EST
  Action: Update
artifact_status changed from ready to publish to Closed
assigned_to changed from 9357 to 100
close_date changed from - to 2005-11-27 15:58:07
Priority changed from 1 to 5
Greg Newby: 11/23/2005 6:42 PM EST
  Comment:
This will now be published as GFD-R.056.  Thanks
very much to the editors/authors for efforts on
this important document.
  Action: Update
Greg Newby: 11/23/2005 6:42 PM EST
  Attachment: GFD-R.056.doc (650.5 KB)
  Action: Update
File added set to 705: GFD-R.056.doc
artifact_status changed from Final Editor Review to ready to publish
assigned_to changed from 302 to 9357
resolution changed from <None> to Published
Greg Newby: 11/08/2005 1:04 PM EST
  Comment:
The GFSG voted to approve this document today.
I'll do a final pass, then this will be published.
Thanks to the authors for work on this document!
  Action: Update
Greg Newby: 11/08/2005 1:04 PM EST
  Action: Update
artifact_status changed from Final 15day GFSG Review to Final Editor Review
assigned_to changed from 320 to 302
Priority changed from 2 to 1
Andreas Savva: 11/07/2005 12:55 AM EST
  Comment:
We have reviewed the comments from the AD and made some minor revisions to the specification. See draft 28 uploaded to this tracker.

Briefly, with numbers referring to Ramin's comments in a previous post:
 
1. Updated
 
2. Decided not to make any changes since the list is not meant to be complete.
 
3. Confirmed with Ramin that this formatting problem is specific to his MS Word.
 
4. Added text to remove this ambiguity.
 
5. Section 3 (Scope) discusses these issues and we think more detail is not appropriate in a normative document. The WG is thinking about a Roadmap 
document and that may be a better place to discuss the choice of features. We have added cross-references from the Application and Resource sections 
back to Section 3.
 
6. Confirmed with Ramin that there is no such example in the specification.
 
7. JSDL 1.0, by design, does not support default values for elements not appearing in a JSDL document. As such, this text is appropriate---it's a 
warning to the user. We have added text to the specification to make the 'no defaults' policy explicit.

We've also made a small number of other revisions, mainly to reconcile minor differences between the specification and the schema. A change-tracked 
version relative to draft 25 is available from the WG's gridforge site. See
https://forge.gridforum.org/projects/jsdl-wg/document/draft-ggf-j
sdl-spec/en/27

Thanks
Andreas
  Action: Update
Andreas Savva: 11/07/2005 12:55 AM EST
  Attachment: draft-ggf-jsdl-spec-028.doc (773 KB)
  Action: Update
File added set to 698: draft-ggf-jsdl-spec-028.doc
Greg Newby: 11/01/2005 10:58 AM EST
  Comment:
Thanks.  This will be discussed the next GFSG standards call
(November 8?).
  Action: Update
Greg Newby: 11/01/2005 10:58 AM EST
  Action: Update
assigned_to changed from 229 to 320
Ramin Yahyapour: 10/31/2005 5:40 PM EST
  Comment:
JSDL provides a job submission description language for computational jobs. 
 The scope has been limited to the basic requirements for computational jobs. 
 That means, there is no support yet for workflows, scheduling information or 
 a general resource description language. However, the authors clearly address 
 these issues as future steps beyond the scope of JSDL. Moreover, they give 
 insight how to extend the current spec. 
 
The current version seems well conceived within the given scope. Therefore, 
 I see no reason why this document should not move forward in the document 
 pipeline. 
 
Specific 
1.	At one point the references, e.g. WS-Agreement [WS-AG], might be updated 
 in the reference section and the text. 
 
2.	Section 3.2: 
A distinction is made for temporal scheduling, data-dependent scheduling and 
 workflow-dependent scheduling. Reading about the temporal scheduling, one might 
 ask what happened with space-scheduling, the question where a job execution. 
 While the given list is not conceived to be exhaustive, it might be sensible 
 to add an entry or alter the "temporal scheduling" to include time and location 
 scheduling. 
 
3.	Sect. 4, and other locations 
I am not sure whether it is just a problem of my Word version, but the document 
 and my print had problems with consistent line spacing. I encountered this 
 problem first in this Section. Between "cannot be satisfied." and "Note, 
 however". 
Such problems occur on several locations in the doc, especially the references 
 on page 61/62 are mal-formatted. 
 
4.	Sect 5.2.4: 
Value "dontOverwrite": Maybe, it should be made clear for this value what the 
 semantic implications for this value is if a file exists. For instance, that 
 no file action will take place if the file already exists.Looking at Sect 6.5.475ff, 
 I was asking myself whether it is clear that a file should be deleted on termination 
 even if it was not created by this job because it already existed before. 
 
5.	Sect 6.1.2: 
Within the JobDescription Element, was there a clear reason why the Application 
 and the Resources Element have a multiplicity of "zero or one". In both cases, 
 I could see a need for having a "zero or many" relation; e.g. the job uses 
 or is a collection of applications; or needs a set of different resources. 
 I assume that the WG had some discussion on this issue. Therefore, it might 
 be helpful to have some lines in the text why this limitation was introduced. 
 
6.	Sect. 6.4.1, Sect 6.4.18.1, Sect 6.4.28: 
In 6.4.28, an example is given in which several "individualCPUCount" occur within 
 one job. However, according to Sect 6.4.1.5 and 6.4.18 the multiplicity of 
 "individual CPUCount" is "zero or one". This is an inconsistency. 
There may be good reason to allow multiple individual CPU counts as given in 
 the example. However, if that is allowed, I have several questions how the 
 other "Individual*" elements can be used in practice if there is the possibility 
 to have multiple "IndividualCPUCount" elements. For instance the relation of 
 Individual time memory etc. may rely on the particular definition CPU set. 
 This would require some referencing/addressing/ordering of the elements, which 
 might make everything quite complicated. 
 
7.	Sect. 6.4.28: 
For practical implementations, I am not sure whether it is a good idea to have 
 the non existence of a TotalResourceCount yield to the result that "consuming 
 system "MAY choose any value".
  Action: Update
Greg Newby: 10/23/2005 2:07 PM EST
  Comment:
Thanks.  This document is in GFSG 15-day final review.
It's tentatively scheduled for discussion on November 1.
  Action: Update
Greg Newby: 10/23/2005 2:07 PM EST
  Action: Update
artifact_status changed from Author Reviewing Edits to Final 15day GFSG Review
assigned_to changed from 302 to 229
resolution changed from Returned to Authors/Group to <None>
Andreas Savva: 10/23/2005 1:45 AM EST
  Comment:
The WG has reviewed and replied to all the public comments. We have made a small number of minor revisions to the JSDL specification. I am attaching 
the revised draft. 

A draft showing the changes made relative to the public comment version is also available on the JSDL-WG's gridforge site:
https://forge.gridforum.org/projects/jsdl-wg/document/draft-ggf-jsdl-spec/en/24

I've assigned the tracker back to Greg Newby as requested but I have not changed the Status or Resolution fields since I was not sure what the next 
values should be.

Please let me know if there is anything else to do.
--
Andreas Savva
  Action: Update
Andreas Savva: 10/23/2005 1:45 AM EST
  Attachment: draft-ggf-jsdl-spec-025.doc (862.5 KB)
  Action: Update
File added set to 693: draft-ggf-jsdl-spec-025.doc
assigned_to changed from 133 to 302
Andreas Savva: 10/06/2005 3:05 PM EST
  Comment:
As editor of this spec I would be happy to comply with any formal branding guidelines the GFSG adopts.
  Action: Update
Geoffrey Fox: 10/05/2005 10:20 PM EST
  Comment:
I suggest this standard be named either
GS-JSDL or
GGF-JSDL
GGF desperately needs a clearer branding and our incoherent
labelling does not help
e.g. we have
GridFTP
DFDL
JSDL
Info-D
OGSA-DAI etc.
They should be clearly associated from name with GGF

I made same comment on WS-Agreement
  Action: Update
Greg Newby: 09/25/2005 4:44 PM EST
  Comment:
Public comment period for this document is closed.  Authors,
please review comments here:
  https://forge.gridforum.org/forum/forum.php?forum_id=552

I see you have already responded to many comments.  When
you are through reviewing the public comments, please
submit the next iteration of this document to this tracker and
assign the tracker back to Greg Newby.  At this point, only
fairly minor changes should be made.

At that time, we will put the document into
final GFSG review, so the area director(s) can make a 
recommendation concerning its publication as a GFD-R-P.
  Action: Update
Greg Newby: 09/25/2005 4:44 PM EST
  Action: Update
artifact_group changed from old-SRM to Compute
artifact_status changed from Public Comment Period to Author Reviewing Edits
assigned_to changed from 9357 to 133
Priority changed from 3 to 2
resolution changed from Accepted to Returned to Authors/Group
Greg Newby: 07/24/2005 4:36 PM EST
  Comment:
Sorry - that draft belonged in a different tracker.  Removed!
  Action: Update
Greg Newby: 07/24/2005 4:36 PM EST
  Action: Update
File Deleted changed from 653: draft-OGSA-authorization-attributes-june-05-hiro.doc to none (no value)
Greg Newby: 07/21/2005 3:41 AM EST
  Comment:
I'm attaching a draft edited by Hiro Kishimoto.  This
belongs in the Public Comment thread, but that
tracker is not configured to accept attached documents.   
Authors/editors: please consider these comments as
you consider other public comments.  gbn
  Action: Update
Greg Newby: 07/21/2005 3:41 AM EST
  Action: Update
File added set to 653: draft-OGSA-authorization-attributes-june-05-hiro.doc
Greg Newby: 07/12/2005 9:59 AM EST
  Comment:
The GFSG discussed this document and has approved
it to move forward to 60-day public comment.   It will
be due 60 days after announcement.
  Action: Update
Greg Newby: 07/12/2005 9:59 AM EST
  Action: Update
artifact_status changed from GFSG Review to Public Comment Period
Priority changed from 4 to 3
Greg Newby: 06/26/2005 3:06 PM EST
  Action: Update
assigned_to changed from 133 to 9357
Greg Newby: 06/26/2005 2:20 PM EST
  Comment:
This looks very good to me - the writing is clear,
the headings and formatting is fine, and it seems to
address a valuable area.

The next step for this is GFSG 15-day review, which I
will try to have complete by the GFSG conference
call on July 15.  After that will be 60-day public comment.
  Action: Update
Greg Newby: 06/26/2005 2:20 PM EST
  Action: Update
artifact_status changed from Initial Editor Review to GFSG Review
assigned_to changed from 302 to 133
Priority changed from 5 to 4
resolution changed from <None> to Accepted
Greg Newby: 06/19/2005 9:02 PM EST
  Comment:
This is in initial editor review.  I'll send feedback 
shortly.  Thanks for this submission!
  Action: Update
Greg Newby: 06/19/2005 9:02 PM EST
  Action: Update
artifact_status changed from Open to Initial Editor Review
Priority changed from - to 5
Andreas Savva: 06/15/2005 12:02 AM EST
  Action: Create

Andreas Savva: 06/15/2005 12:02 AM EST
  Attachment: draft-ggf-jsdl-spec-021.doc (856.5 KB)
  Action: Update
File added set to 629: draft-ggf-jsdl-spec-021.doc

 
 
 
< Previous
 
 
Next >
 


The Open Grid Forum Contact Webmaster | Report a problem | GridForge Help
This is a static archive of the previous Open Grid Forum GridForge content management system saved from host forge.ogf.org file /sf/go/artf3415?nav=1 at Thu, 03 Nov 2022 16:04:43 GMT