You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@airavata.apache.org by Suresh Marru <sm...@apache.org> on 2014/02/21 21:41:00 UTC
Removing current registry and orchestrator services
Hi All,
As I noted on the JIRA (https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AIRAVATA-1005), it will be useful to start exploring the service versions of the CPI’s for internal communication. To avoid conflicts, can we remove the current registry-service which is mainly used to bootstrap database and also current orchestrator-service which was a simple proof of concept thrift file with no implementation?
After we remove them, I can start committing the thrift version of these services.
Suresh
Re: Removing current registry and orchestrator services
Posted by Lahiru Gunathilake <gl...@gmail.com>.
On Fri, Feb 21, 2014 at 3:41 PM, Suresh Marru <sm...@apache.org> wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> As I noted on the JIRA (
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AIRAVATA-1005), it will be useful
> to start exploring the service versions of the CPI's for internal
> communication. To avoid conflicts, can we remove the current
> registry-service which is mainly used to bootstrap database and also
> current orchestrator-service
+1, orchestrator-service is not implemented yet.
Lahiru
> which was a simple proof of concept thrift file with no implementation?
>
> After we remove them, I can start committing the thrift version of these
> services.
>
> Suresh
--
System Analyst Programmer
PTI Lab
Indiana University
Re: Removing current registry and orchestrator services
Posted by Suresh Marru <sm...@apache.org>.
On Feb 22, 2014, at 12:21 AM, Amila Jayasekara <th...@gmail.com> wrote:
> +1 for removing registry service.
> I can remember registry service leading to a race condition and to avoid that we had to introduce an unnecessary check. More info in [1].
I agree. We need to move the registry startup scripts into the new registry cpi-service and remove this. We can remove orchestrator without any impact.
Suresh
>
> [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AIRAVATA-879
>
> Thanks
> Amila
>
>
> On Fri, Feb 21, 2014 at 3:41 PM, Suresh Marru <sm...@apache.org> wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> As I noted on the JIRA (https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AIRAVATA-1005), it will be useful to start exploring the service versions of the CPI’s for internal communication. To avoid conflicts, can we remove the current registry-service which is mainly used to bootstrap database and also current orchestrator-service which was a simple proof of concept thrift file with no implementation?
>
> After we remove them, I can start committing the thrift version of these services.
>
> Suresh
>
Re: Removing current registry and orchestrator services
Posted by Amila Jayasekara <th...@gmail.com>.
+1 for removing registry service.
I can remember registry service leading to a race condition and to avoid
that we had to introduce an unnecessary check. More info in [1].
[1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AIRAVATA-879
Thanks
Amila
On Fri, Feb 21, 2014 at 3:41 PM, Suresh Marru <sm...@apache.org> wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> As I noted on the JIRA (
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AIRAVATA-1005), it will be useful
> to start exploring the service versions of the CPI's for internal
> communication. To avoid conflicts, can we remove the current
> registry-service which is mainly used to bootstrap database and also
> current orchestrator-service which was a simple proof of concept thrift
> file with no implementation?
>
> After we remove them, I can start committing the thrift version of these
> services.
>
> Suresh