Closed ruchim closed 6 years ago
Note: I think a tech talk or PO choice would be valuable on whether this grouping is happening "pre-metadata", "as an endpoint option" or "in visualization code".
FWIW I would lean towards one of the latter two options
I definitely like the idea of pre-metadata as well.
Only if it does not involve retroactively applying it to old events.
So if you need it to apply to old data it needs to be post-metadata
Oh, I was actually saying I prefer the other two (ie not "pre-metadata" 😳) - the preference being that we record everything, and then choose how to display it later
Ah! you mean evolve the timing diagram logic to group execution events?
When using PAPI v2, the execution events for a single job are broken down into a lot of minute actions, and those actions are represented in the timing diagram. The issue is that the level of granularity provided by Cromwell's execution events is too zoomed in, and its not easy to digest. Since the operation metadata itself will hold most of this granularity, it should be useful for Cromwell to group certain actions into a higher level grouping concept based on its understanding of the job. For example, here's the execution events from a single run:
Although there's a lot of events -- there are a few key stages here:
AC: Condense the execution events generated by the PAPI into those 5 categories inside the Cromwell metadata.