perfsonar-dev - Re: [pS-dev] Re: BWCTL MA Schema
Subject: perfsonar development work
List archive
- From: "Jeff W. Boote" <>
- To: Roman Lapacz <>
- Cc: Verena Venus <>, , Roman Lapacz <>, Martin Swany <>, Szymon Trocha <>, perfSONAR developers list <>
- Subject: Re: [pS-dev] Re: BWCTL MA Schema
- Date: Fri, 6 Feb 2009 09:07:16 -0700
Jason, Roman, Verena,
I don't think it is such a good idea to keep both value and throughput. This complicates clients since they will not know which one a particular service will use. I can see doing this as part of a well defined transition plan - for example this version of the service MUST specify both so that old clients are not broken, and value is expected to be removed in the next major release.
Just letting service use which ever one they want is not nice for clients. (Or am I mis-understanding?)
jeff
On Feb 6, 2009, at 6:39 AM, Roman Lapacz wrote:
Verena Venus wrote:
Hi all,
Am Friday 06 February 2009 14:23:24 schrieb Roman Lapacz:
Jason Zurawski wrote:It would be nice, if you could send me the new schemata/examples when everything is settled. I can do the changes then very quickly.
Hi Jason,
The latter is fine for me as well.The schema does not have 'throughput' or 'jitter' elements.Corrected in my doc and the iperf schema in the main pS repo. Jitter
*should* have been there since this is reported by iperf UDP tests.
Throughput is more descriptive than 'value' in my opinion (since there
are many 'values' that can be returned by an iperf test). I have
added throughput to the schema but kept value for now in case VV or
anyone else has a use for it.
I think we should talk about deprecating the attribute or perhaps
allowing it to stay with a use that will vary by service (I would
prefer the latter).
I've just created RC1 of Java SQL MA v.2.1.1 with iperf stuff and
previous schema. On Monday I will create the new one (RC2) with your
updates (compatibility has hight priority!).
Verena, any comments on changes?
I will updated the service and message examples and send them to you on Monday.
Roman
- Re: BWCTL MA Schema, Jason Zurawski, 02/06/2009
- Re: BWCTL MA Schema, Roman Lapacz, 02/06/2009
- Re: [pS-dev] Re: BWCTL MA Schema, Verena Venus, 02/06/2009
- Re: [pS-dev] Re: BWCTL MA Schema, Jason Zurawski, 02/06/2009
- Re: [pS-dev] Re: BWCTL MA Schema, Roman Lapacz, 02/06/2009
- Re: [pS-dev] Re: BWCTL MA Schema, Jeff W. Boote, 02/06/2009
- Re: [pS-dev] Re: BWCTL MA Schema, Jason Zurawski, 02/06/2009
- Re: [pS-dev] Re: BWCTL MA Schema, Jeff W. Boote, 02/06/2009
- Re: [pS-dev] Re: BWCTL MA Schema, Roman Lapacz, 02/09/2009
- Re: [pS-dev] Re: BWCTL MA Schema, Jason Zurawski, 02/09/2009
- Re: [pS-dev] Re: BWCTL MA Schema, Jeff W. Boote, 02/09/2009
- Re: [pS-dev] Re: BWCTL MA Schema, Jason Zurawski, 02/09/2009
- Re: [pS-dev] Re: BWCTL MA Schema, Roman Lapacz, 02/10/2009
- Re: [pS-dev] Re: BWCTL MA Schema, Jeff W. Boote, 02/06/2009
- Re: [pS-dev] Re: BWCTL MA Schema, Jason Zurawski, 02/06/2009
- Re: [pS-dev] Re: BWCTL MA Schema, Jeff W. Boote, 02/06/2009
- Re: [pS-dev] Re: BWCTL MA Schema, Verena Venus, 02/06/2009
- Re: BWCTL MA Schema, Roman Lapacz, 02/06/2009
- Re: BWCTL MA Schema, Jason Zurawski, 02/09/2009
- Re: BWCTL MA Schema, Roman Lapacz, 02/09/2009
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.16.