IPP Software Navigation Tools IPP Links Communication Pan-STARRS Links

Changes between Version 214 and Version 215 of ippToPsps


Ignore:
Timestamp:
Mar 27, 2012, 1:18:40 PM (14 years ago)
Author:
rhenders
Comment:

--

Legend:

Unmodified
Added
Removed
Modified
  • ippToPsps

    v214 v215  
    315315
    316316
    317 = Recovery system design =
    318 
    319 Currently, the IPP to PSPS interface is a 'one-way' system. Batches are created by {{{ippToPsps}}} and posted on an IPP instance of the datastore. These batches are collected by the {{{DXLayer}}} on the PSPS side and sent on to the ODM. The IPP urgently requires some feedback from PSPS to determine which batches have succeeded and which have failed (and why they failed). With this information, data can be either deleted or regenerated accordingly. This is important simply because, with such large data volumes, we cannot afford the high levels of redundancy currently in place. At present, for a given batch, the following copies exist within the pipeline:
    320 
    321  - a copy exists on the IPP cluster after generation by ippToPsps program
    322  - a copy exists on the IPP datastore after publication by ippToPsps
    323  - the {{{DXLayer}}} retains a copy after it has sent the csv version to the ODM
    324  - the {{{DXLayer}}} also keeps a copy of these (larger) csv files
    325 
    326 We therefore need to quickly implement the basic framework of a feedback loop so that the IPP can quickly learn if a given batch has been successfully merged into the PSPS database or not. This will enable it to safely delete the data files and remove the copy from the datastore. This will also form the basis for a more comprehensive recovery system, to be developed at a future date.
    327 
    328 == Previous design ==
    329 
    330 
    331 
    332 {{{
    333                                               .............................
    334                                              .   ___________               .
    335                                              .  |           |              .
    336          ---------------------------------------| datastore |              .
    337         |                                    .  |___________|              .
    338  .......|...........................         .       /|\                   .
    339 .  ____\|/_____       ___________   .        .    ____|____        _____   .
    340 . |           |      |           |  .        .   |         |      |     |  .
    341 . | ippToPsps |----->| datastore |-------------->| DXLayer |<---->| ODM |  .
    342 . |___________|      |___________|  .        .   |_________|      |_____|  .
    343 .                                   .        .                             .
    344  ...................................         ..............................   
    345                
    346                IPP                                       PSPS                         
    347                                          
    348 }}}
    349 
    350 
    351 Previously, Conrad and I had discussed a design whereby a second datastore instance would be utilized, this time on the PSPS cluster. The {{{DXLayer}}} would act as the 'middle-man', polling the ODM for updates on loading progress, then posting the results on the PSPS datastore for the IPP to consume. Polling this, {{{ippToPsps}}} could acquire a list of batches it knows are safe to be discarded. Simultaneously, the {{{DXLayer}}} could delete its copies of the same redundant data.
    352 
    353 The update placed on the PSPS datastore could take the form of an XML file. At first this would simply detail those files it is safe to delete, but could evolve into a more complex recovery report, i.e. which batches failed, and what is required to be done by the IPP.
    354 
    355 == New design ==
    356 
    357 {{{
    358                                                                                                      
    359          ------------------------------------------------------------       
    360         |                                                            |     
    361 ........|...........................          .......................|.....                 
    362 .  ____\|/_____       ___________   .        .    _________        __|__   .
    363 . |           |      |           |  .        .   |         |      |     |  .
    364 . | ippToPsps |----->| datastore |-------------->| DXLayer |----->| ODM |  .
    365 . |___________|      |___________|  .        .   |_________|      |_____|  .
    366 .                                   .        .                             .
    367  ...................................         ..............................   
    368                
    369                IPP                                       PSPS                         
    370                                          
    371 }}}
    372 
    373 
    374 Instead of creating a new datastore instance within PSPS and using the {{{DXLayer}}} as communication layer between the ODM and the IPP, we propose that the {{{DXLayer}}} forms no part of the feedback system. It should be simplified such that it only facilitates loading, i.e. polling the IPP datastore for new data, converting it to csv files then sending these on to the ODM. Instead, to complete the circle, the {{{ippToPsps}}} code will poll the ODM directly, bypassing the {{{DXLayer}}} altogether. This also forms the basis of a full recovery system as, at a later date, {{{ippToPsps}}} can be coded to respond intelligently to the myriad of errors that may occur within the ODM. The {{{DXLayer}}} need know nothing of the how or why a certain batch is being submitted by the IPP, it should just grab it, convert it and pass it along to the ODM.
    375 
    376 This design would therefore mean simplifying a major PSPS component, the {{{DXLayer}}}, but rather than waste the code already written, it would be taken and used within {{{ippToPsps}}} (for example, the ODM polling scripts). We would simply be shifting responsibility over from PSPS to IPP. Over parts could be dropped completely. For example, since {{{ippToPsps}}} will (soon) keep a record of all the jobs and corresponding exposure IDs in the IPP database, it is unnecessary for this information to be duplicated by the {{{DXLayer}}}, which currently has its own local database for this information.
    377 
    378 The question remains of what should be done with the copies of the data currently retained by the {{{DXLayer}}}? The options are that it can either be deleted automatically after a defined amount of time, or the IPP can send a list of batches it is safe to delete through the datastore, or perhaps the {{{DXLayer}}} should not retain files at all. Since it can quickly and easily acquire data from the IPP datastore anyway, it is probably unnecessary for it to hold any copies.
    379 
    380 
    381 == Advantages over previous design ==
    382 
    383  - no need for second datastore (not a big overhead, but it would require additional systems administration in an already complicated system)
    384  - no need to define new XML standard that incorporates the whole array of recovery options
    385  - no need for the {{{DXLayer}}} to poll the ODM
    386  - no need for the {{{DXLayer}}} to have a database to log the batches (already done on the IPP side)
    387  - no need for the {{{DXLayer}}} to keep data at all?
    388317
    389318= Known issues =