[provenance-challenge] Re: Optional Query 9

[Joe Futrelle]

Right, and the general issue is for graph A (of the execution that halted early) and graph B (of the execution which completed) is A always a subgraph of B or is there something about recording halting during failure that would lead to a more complicated relationship between A and B?

--
Joe Futrelle
Cyberenvironments and Technologies
National Center for Supercomputing Applications
http://www.ncsa.uiuc.edu/People/futrelle

----- "David Koop" <dakoop at cs.utah.edu> wrote:

> Perhaps the query could be rephrased to "What is the difference  
> between the provenance of a workflow that executed without halting and
>  
> the provenance of the same workflow when it did halt?".
> 
> David Koop, University of Utah
> 
> On Apr 27, 2009, at 12:45 PM, Robert Clark wrote:
> 
> > Hello All,
> >
> > I wanted to raise an objection I have to suggested query nine and  
> > see what kind of responses my objection yields.
> >
> > Which steps were not executed because of halt?
> >
> > I believe this is *not* a provenance query, it asks a question about
>  
> > what may have happened in the future not a question about what has 
> 
> > happened in the past. To me, this query seems more at home in a  
> > workflow system study rather than a challenge studying the  
> > interoperability of a provenance model.
> >
> > Thank you,
> >
> > Robert Clark, NCSA