[DALI] posting parameters to a DAI-async (aka UWS) job

[Paul Harrison]

I think that there might be another use-case for this - as I wrote below, but I see that I had mangled my first sentence...

Basically it might allow for a quick way to rerun a job with a tweaked parameter - if there were also an easy way to copy a job instance.

btw - multi valued parameters could already be specified in the initial post by just repeating the parameter/value pair for instance


On 2013-04 -26, at 10:36, Mark Taylor <m.b.taylor at bristol.ac.uk> wrote:

> I'm all in favour of banning posting params to an existing job.
> 
> Posting to /parameters adding more instances: are you suggesting
> the possibility of PUT to overwrite the param as well (and DELETE?)?
> If not, this seems like the capability to do just one rather specialised
> thing (add items to a multiple-valued parameter) to the parameters
> following job creation, while other ways of changing it are not
> available.  I've got no strong objection, but it doesn't seem
> like a particularly well-motivated capability.
> 



On 2013-04 -26, at 08:51, Paul Harrison <paul.harrison at manchester.ac.uk> wrote:

> My other thought that is related to a use that might be made of being a this facility to change individual parameters of a job - one typical one is to be able to re-run a job with just one parameter slightly tweaked.
> 
> It would be convenient for the client if there were a way of getting a representation of the existing job that could be simply POSTed back to re-run it if necessary - the current XML representation of the job state requires the client to do work to transform that into a form that can be resubmitted - perhaps there could be an option to return a suitably encoded form of the job parameters that could be simply rePOSTed to create a new job?
> 
> The other alternative to this is that there is an explicit way to copy a job on the DALI/UWS server, so that there is a new copy of a job put into the pending state which can then have a parameter tweaked before being executed - I suspect that this would be a relatively easy operation for most servers to implement, and would be very convenient for clients (as well as allowing the possibility of saving bandwidth  re-uploading large parameter values).
>