Re: [science-iwg] Sandia requirements for workflow engines

[Christopher Brooks <cxh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

I've made some updates.

I think scalability is our biggest issue.  Ptolemy II allows models to be modified while they are running.  If this was removed, then there would be a speed up.

We have used code generation to C or Java as a solution.

_Christopher

On 6/18/15 12:53 PM, Erwin de Ley wrote:

Hi Ernest/Foss, all,

Thank you for the requirements list.
These would be relevant as part of the initial requirements of Triquetrum.

I've tried to fill in a feedback for the given requirements, based on the existing features in Ptolemy & Passerelle, and the desired features in Triquetrum.
Christopher, Matt, Jay, can you review and adapt/correct where needed?

thanks
erwin


Friedman-Hill, Ernest schreef op 18/06/2015 om 20:24:

I enjoyed meeting some of you for the first time today.  This is the evaluation sheet our team at Sandia has used while looking at workflow products for use with the Sandia Analysis Workbench — it’s our defacto set of requirements.

_______________________________________________
science-iwg mailing list
science-iwg@xxxxxxxxxxx
To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/science-iwg

-- 
Christopher Brooks, PMP                       University of California
Academic Program Manager & Software Engineer  US Mail: 337 Cory Hall
CHESS/iCyPhy/Ptolemy/TerraSwarm               Berkeley, CA 94720-1774
cxh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, 707.332.0670           (Office: 545Q Cory)

Attachment: workflow_engine_requirements.docx
Description: MS-Word 2007 document