Difference between revisions of "NGI International Task Review MS109 Latvia"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 12: | Line 12: | ||
| US_HS_Application_Database_HowToImprove = More effort is necessary to try and migrate several user communities from commercial or own custom-written software to generic reusable open-source packages from AppDB. Also, user communities have to be persuaded that publishing and sharing their long-term inhouse developed tools will benefit them and not steal their unique know-how and academic value. | | US_HS_Application_Database_HowToImprove = More effort is necessary to try and migrate several user communities from commercial or own custom-written software to generic reusable open-source packages from AppDB. Also, user communities have to be persuaded that publishing and sharing their long-term inhouse developed tools will benefit them and not steal their unique know-how and academic value. | ||
| US_HS_Training_Assessment = | | US_HS_Training_Assessment = Training is organised on request by individual user comunities. Such current system is sustainable. There are no regularly scheduled (i.e. monthly, annual) mandatory training events, nor are any planned. No e-training is available, nor is one planned by local means. Due to small available effort to this task and small user community, the e-training material would require either too much overhead to keep up-to date, or due to very infrequent usage of those tools (when new user group joins) it would constantly be out-of-date. | ||
| US_HS_Training_Score = 3 | | US_HS_Training_Score = 3 | ||
| US_HS_Training_HowToImprove = Migration of several sites to desktop-grid compatible ARC/Condor middleware is expected within PQ4 to significantly improve amount of available automated tools for user communities. | | US_HS_Training_HowToImprove = Migration of several sites to desktop-grid compatible ARC/Condor middleware is expected within PQ4 to significantly improve amount of available automated tools for user communities, as well as offer re-usable training and more seamless upscaling from using local Condor based clusters and desktop grids to NGI and EGI scale grid computing. No e-courses or national training events planned (would be inefficient). | ||
| US_HS_Consultancy_Assessment = Due to small number of research communities, highly interactive consultancy is provided to these communities. Mainly consultancy, similarly as training, is provided through local meetings, phone conferences and Instant Messaging (Skype or Jabber). In case none of previous are available, a slower approach of using problem-specific or general grid user mailing lists is employed. | | US_HS_Consultancy_Assessment = Due to small number of research communities, highly interactive consultancy is provided to these communities. Mainly consultancy, similarly as training, is provided through local meetings, phone conferences and Instant Messaging (Skype or Jabber). In case none of previous are available, a slower approach of using problem-specific or general grid user mailing lists is employed. |
Revision as of 12:18, 10 March 2011
User Services
Human Services (Table 1)
EGI-InSPIRE | EGI_DS | Name | Assessment | Score | How to Improve |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
NA3.3N | U-N-3 U-N-13 | Requirements Gathering | There is no structured or formally operational system for gathering and processing requirements of a local scale. There are no plans to deploy one by own means. Due to relatively small national research community as a whole, requirements of user communities are gathered during direct contacts and evaluated on individual basis. Formal local system would not be sustainable considering small amount of research groups and necessary operational effort overhead. Besides direct contact, Instant Messaging & VoIP (Skype, Jabber) as well as email communications are used, including national grid user mailing list. So far the required features for some user communities were approved and implemented in few selected Latvian NGI sites only. | 3 | Global requirements submission and processing system could be useful (keeping it non-mandatory), especially one allowing to exchange requirements experience between similar user communities in different NGIs. NGIs should be allowed to keep existing approach of maintaining communications with user communities directly, but the global requirements system should be available for NGI input to propogate these requirements. In case the original NGI of the requesting user community is unable to fulfill the requirements, other NGIs could voluntarily step in and offer necessary resources to these research groups.
Also, greater oppourtunities and financing should be provided for user community members to participate in global EGI User Forum events to exchange ideas on necessary requirements as well as success stories. |
NA3.3N | U-N-14 U-N-15 | Application Database | Currently Latvian NGI has not exported any package information to AppDB and is not using any information from it either. Most user communities in Latvian NGI use either their own custom-tailored experiment-specific software, which does not provide reasonable re-usability for other communities, or licensed commercial software like ANSYS, Matlab or GAMESS is run using the licenses available to specific communities, thus these software packages cannot be exported to AppDB as generally available. The use of AppDB in Latvian NGI has not been widespread also due to lack of real use cases when local user communities approach NGI "empty-handed", i.e. - without already working custom-made or commercial/open-source software. Currently, all user communities are under scenario of upscaling their computations from local clusters. In case some generic open-souce software will be used in the future by some research community, it will be exported to AppDB. Also, Latvian NGI needs to convince many user communities that sharing their custom-tailored tools will actually benefit them, since for many of these resarch groups these custom tools are the essence of their expert know-how and ensures they have unique knowledge that is valuable for quality publications. | 2 | More effort is necessary to try and migrate several user communities from commercial or own custom-written software to generic reusable open-source packages from AppDB. Also, user communities have to be persuaded that publishing and sharing their long-term inhouse developed tools will benefit them and not steal their unique know-how and academic value. |
NA3.3N | U-N-16 U-N-17 | Training | Training is organised on request by individual user comunities. Such current system is sustainable. There are no regularly scheduled (i.e. monthly, annual) mandatory training events, nor are any planned. No e-training is available, nor is one planned by local means. Due to small available effort to this task and small user community, the e-training material would require either too much overhead to keep up-to date, or due to very infrequent usage of those tools (when new user group joins) it would constantly be out-of-date. | 3 | Migration of several sites to desktop-grid compatible ARC/Condor middleware is expected within PQ4 to significantly improve amount of available automated tools for user communities, as well as offer re-usable training and more seamless upscaling from using local Condor based clusters and desktop grids to NGI and EGI scale grid computing. No e-courses or national training events planned (would be inefficient). |
NA3.3N | U-N-12 U-N-18 U-N-19 | Consultancy | Due to small number of research communities, highly interactive consultancy is provided to these communities. Mainly consultancy, similarly as training, is provided through local meetings, phone conferences and Instant Messaging (Skype or Jabber). In case none of previous are available, a slower approach of using problem-specific or general grid user mailing lists is employed. | 4 | In the future a possible online archive (FAQ or forum) would be usefull for new users who stumble across previously discussed problems. Ideally, such local user support/consultancy resource should be hosted in local language. |
Operations Services
Human Services (Table 2)
EGI-InSPIRE | EGI_DS | Name | Assessment | Score | How to Improve |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
SA1.4N | O-N-9 | Requirements Gathering | your assessment here | 0-5 | how to improve |
SA1.1N | O-N-9 | Operations Coordination | write here | 0-5 | write here |
SA1.2N | O-N-9 | Security | write here | 0-5 | write here |
Infrastructure Services (Table 3)
EGI-InSPIRE | EGI_DS | Name | Assessment | Score | How to Improve |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
SA1.3N | O-N-9 | Software Rollout | write here | 0-5 | write here |
SA1.4N | O-N-3 | Monitoring | write here | 0-5 | write here |
SA1.5N | O-N-2 | Accounting | write here | 0-5 | write here |
SA1.4N | O-N-1 O-N-4 | Configuration Repository and Operations Portal | write here | 0-5 | write here |
SA1.6N SA1.7N | O-N-6 O-N-7 | Helpdesk | write here | 0-5 | write here |
SA1.8N | O-N-5 O-N-8 | Core Services | write here | 0-5 | write here |
Other (Table 4)
EGI-InSPIRE | EGI_DS | Name | Assessment | Score | How to Improve |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
NA2.3N | Policy Development | write here | 0-5 | write here | |
NA2.2N | E-N-2 | Dissemination | write here | 0-5 | write here |