Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

identify constraint violations in the proposed plan #1

Open
rdicosmo opened this issue Nov 29, 2013 · 2 comments
Open

identify constraint violations in the proposed plan #1

rdicosmo opened this issue Nov 29, 2013 · 2 comments

Comments

@rdicosmo
Copy link
Member

It would be extremely useful to read all the specifications of the Aeolus model (including conflicts and capacity constraints), and after finding a plan, verify which constraints are violated, and emit an appropriate warning (maybe different classes of warning for the 3 different violations... provides abused, requirements undersatisfied, and conflicts violated).

This will help the used decide whether the plan is viable, or allow an iterative approach to find a better plan when needed.

@talascu
Copy link
Member

talascu commented Dec 3, 2013

Indeed. As odd as it may sound, I never thought about this possibility.

At the moment we are focusing on the following development directions:

  1. conflict detection. If conflicts are "global" we could issue a warning when a potentially conflicting state is entered.
  2. conflict avoidance. If conflicts are "local" we could generate the plan, then from it generate a "conflict-graph" and finally find a minimal set of machines/locations that need to be used in order to avoid conflicts.

As for capacity constraints we are starting to think about the possibilities to integrate them, but as for now we don't have much material on this topic.

If the above issues turn out to be too complex, we could, in a first phase, do what you suggest and report violations of the deployment plan.

@rdicosmo
Copy link
Member Author

rdicosmo commented Dec 5, 2013

On Tue, Dec 03, 2013 at 02:05:47AM -0800, Tudor A. Lascu wrote:

Indeed. As odd as it may sound, I never thought about this possibility.

At the moment we are focusing on the following development directions:

  1. conflict detection. If conflicts are "global" we could issue a warning when
    a potentially conflicting state is entered.
  2. conflict avoidance. If conflicts are "local" we could generate the plan,
    then from it generate a "conflict-graph" and finally find a minimal set of
    machines/locations that need to be used in order to avoid conflicts.

OK!

As for capacity constraints we are starting to think about the possibilities to
integrate them, but as for now we don't have much material on this topic.

If the above issues turn out to be too complex, we could, in a first phase, do
what you suggest and report violations of the deployment plan.

Looking forward to see the results :-)


Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub.*

Roberto Di Cosmo


Professeur En delegation a l'INRIA
PPS E-mail: [email protected]
Universite Paris Diderot WWW : http://www.dicosmo.org
Case 7014 Tel : ++33-(0)1-57 27 92 20
5, Rue Thomas Mann
F-75205 Paris Cedex 13 Identica: http://identi.ca/rdicosmo

FRANCE. Twitter: http://twitter.com/rdicosmo

Attachments:
MIME accepted, Word deprecated

http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html

Office location:

Bureau 3020 (3rd floor)
Batiment Sophie Germain
Avenue de France

Metro Bibliotheque Francois Mitterrand, ligne 14/RER C

GPG fingerprint 2931 20CE 3A5A 5390 98EC 8BFC FCCA C3BE 39CB 12D3

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants