Hi,
I think you could state it even more strongly: there has yet to be a
stable R-GMA service on LCG which works! [ note i left out 'remains' here ]
R-GMA has been one of the more frequent topics of cries for help on
LCG-ROLLOUT. Aside from that I know that as recently as January, teams
within CERN/LCG were having to create 'workarounds for basic problems'.
I think making R-GMA functionality a critical test is indeed a very good
thing, but it should not be the site that is removed if the test fails
... it should be R-GMA. I love the information model, the python
interface, the sql queries, etc but it's time to stop producing new code
bases and concentrate on making the system work.
J "time to catch a train otherwise i'd continue ranting" T
David Groep wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Jiri Kosina wrote:
> > I have just heard from Marcin Radecki that R-GMA service is going to be
> > considered as critical test in SFT quite soon.
> > ...
> > I personally think that making the service, which fails on 31 sites,
> > which are healthy when not counting R-GMA as not a very lucky step.
>
> I'd like to concur, since it has been virtually impossible to get a
> stable R-GMA service which remains working for more than one release.
> And indeed, while the changeover to the new-but-not-yet-the-latest R-GMA
> version 4.0 may have solved some of the old problems, it did introduce
> a lot of new failure modes...
>
> Can we wait in making R-GMA a critical component till the product has
> shown to be stable (only minor changes, and no radical new code bases
> please) for at least one release and deployment at a large scale?
> It would lighten the stress of several admins and give the R-GMA
> people time to stabilise the (deployment of) the current release.
>
> And please, no migrations to version 5+ in the mean time :-)
>
> Cheers,
> DavidG.
>
>>
>> This, among other things, means (when looking at the latest report),
>> that 31 sites, if I count correctly, would be marked 'CT', even if
>> everything else, apart from R-GMA, was tested as OK.
>>
>> I have posted many times questions regarding non-working R-GMA setup
>> (I am using YAIM on RH 7.3 on both farms I manage, and I _never_ got
>> R-GMA working, neither did I receive any helpful advice) (for example
>> here:
>> http://www.listserv.rl.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A2=ind0502&L=LCG-ROLLOUT&P=R14255&I=-3
>> - with no reply, and more can be found).
>>
>> I personally think that making the service, which fails on 31 sites,
>> which are healthy when not counting R-GMA as not a very lucky step.
>>
>> Thanks for any comment,
>>
>
>
|