[MOBY-dev] BioMOBY Asynchronous Service Call Proposal v2.3

[Johan Karlsson]

Hi Paul,

Well, it depends on the particular service? So, any such property must 
be optional.

a) For a service that returns a "Percent progress" or similar event, a 
client could "guess" when to do the next polling (would not be totally 
accurate, of course, but still). Here the service would basically do the 
same "intelligent" guessing that the client would do and create this 
property.
b) For a service that returns a "Heartbeat" or similar event, a client 
cannot guess when it is appropriate to do the next polling (since not 
even the service knows when it will finish). Here, no property could be 
created.

Not sure if it is necessary with a new property. If a service wants to 
help the client to do such "prediction", the service can already use 
LSAE event blocks when it returns status to "communicate" with the 
client; step progress event and percent progress?

Comments from others?

Kind regards,
Johan

Paul Gordon wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Sorry I'm getting into this discussion so late, but it would seem to me 
> that it would be helpful to add a ResourceProperty that gives the client 
> a hint as to how often they should check back for an answer.  The server 
> would have a much better idea of the appropriate interval than the 
> client, no?  If my client software generally checks every minute for 
> async job responses, but the process always takes a day, that's a lot 
> (1440) of useless polling requests.  A bit like the Refresh header in 
> HTTP...
>
> Cheers,
>
> Paul
>   
>> For an updated version of the proposal for asynchronous services:
>>
>> http://twiki.inab.org/twiki/pub/INB/INBDocsRoot/BioMOBY_Asynchronous_Service_Call_Proposal_WSRF_v2.3.pdf
>>
>> Changes:
>> - Added missing parts to the XML examples (thanks Pieter)
>> - Removed hasCallingDetail, now instead suggesting a new value for 
>> dc:format (thanks Martin). Because allowed value in dc:format comes from 
>> the MyGrid ontology we should coordinate with them to find exactly what 
>> value to put there.
>>
>> If there are no major issues left to discuss, could the RFC committee 
>> please call a vote on the proposal for October 1st?
>>
>> Kind regards,
>> Johan
>>
>>   
>>     
>
> _______________________________________________
> MOBY-dev mailing list
> MOBY-dev at lists.open-bio.org
> http://lists.open-bio.org/mailman/listinfo/moby-dev
>
>   

-- 
Johan Karlsson
Instituto Nacional de Bioinformática (INB)
Integrated Bioinformatics Node (GNV-5)
Dpto. de Arquitectura de Computadores
Campus Universitario de Teatinos, despacho 2.3.9a
29071 Málaga (Spain) 
+34 95 213 3387