Software Tools Minutes - 1 November 1996 ========================================= Present: Alan Jonckheere, Fritz Bartlett, Herb Greenlee, Lee Leuking, John Hobbs, Stan Krzywdzinski, Jerry O'Connell, Serban Protopopescu, Harrison Prosper, Qizhong Li-Demarteau, Laura Paterno (Scribe), Stu Fuess The agenda for today's meeting was Discussion of Draft Recommendation for Databases - Laura Paterno Discussion of Draft Recommendation of Configuration Management - Alan Jonckheere Laura presented the Draft Recommendation for databases. Here is a summary of all the comments from the discussions which followed. In section 2 (Run 1 Database) it was felt that the FATMEN catalog be mentioned separately since it was not a DBL3 database but an RZ based database. Also it was felt that the reason DBL3 and not RDB was used for the calibration and monitoring constants was that it was transportable across platforms and RDB was not. In section 3 (Run 2 Needs) it was felt that a list of the things to be stored in a database should be port here (i.e. calibration & monitoring constants, etc). Also the wording on modifying the interface between the staging and the combined FATMEN catalog/Production Database should be more clearly specified. In section 4 (Database Management System Requirements): The suggestion was made to split this up into a requirements and preferences section. Two subsections will specify requirements and preferences. These comments will not reflect how the options listed in this version of the document should be split into the subsections unless it was specifically stated at the meeting. - provide replication of user data replaced with can replicate the database automatically across platforms - Performance at least equal to what we have now It was requested that this be quantified more. How quick do we need calibration data after a calibration run has finished. Basically state here the performance needs (access times and commit times) for Run 2. - performance must be scaleable for the number of users and the size of the database This should be reworded to include expected numbers of users to which performance should scale and should also factor into it the fact that access may be through replicated copies of the database to help improve performance. - must be compatible with third party tools Removed this from the requirements - work in a fully distributed, heterogenous enviroment Reworded this to say work in a fully distributed, multi-platform environment. - Easy to use Web connectivity Put this into the preferences section and reword it to say easy to query via the Web. - must be ODMG compliant Reword this to say must be standards compliant and then list what the standards are (including ODMG). - Vendor has 24x7 call-in support Removed from list - Must have sufficient Database administration tools to do optimization and setup of the database without using C++. Removed without using C++ Fritz also requested that Performance monitoring be added as a requirement. Other preferences that were suggested include: prefer site-wide license and also some arrangement for licensing to remote institutions. It was also pointed out the a minimal database may be needed to achieve performance requirements (like calibration read out once a calibration run is done cannot exceed 5 minutes). These should be included in a separate section for minimal databases. In section 5 (Databases Reviewed) it was also suggested that Relational and minimalist database evaluations or comments be included here. It was also suggested that a reference to the Working Group Report be made here as well. In section 6 (Database Recommendations) the following suggestions were made: - remove We recommend that each database used in Run 1 be looked at to determine its usage as this was already done by the Working Group - remove recommendation of centralized versus distributed as it is already a part of the requirements recommendation. - move the OO database solution recommendation to the bottom and add pending testing. If testing shows that it can meet both a high speed and normal access mode then a minimal solution is not necessary otherwise a minimal solution is also recommend where performance speed is an issue. - add in a recommendation to minimize the number of databases used. - change the recommendation for further evaluation to say that the joint group should do the performance testing (access times, commit times, etc) but the D0 group should look at ease of usage and how it works in our environment. Alan Jonckheere present status of the Code Management working group. The recommendation of the joint CD/CDF/D0 group is to use CVS (with the extensions made by Sky Survey) for code management, UPS/UPD for product distribution and BaBar SoftRelTools for developer release type tools. CVS, UPS/UPD and the BaBar tools are already installed at D0 and have been tested and are ready (for the most part) for use. Some tools still need to be created (like the compilation of code on more than one platform). At the end of the meeting Laura agreed to have a new version of the Database recommendation ready for review by Friday. Please send your comments about database recommendation to Laura and Qizhong.