 |
 |
Hi all, Two emails sent to the list bounced. In one case the reason was related to the list restrictions: the list was configured to accepted emails from registered email addresses only, and the person used a different email. In second case it was a big attachment. I realize it is inconvenient having to remember which email address to use, so I opened up the list: the list now accepts emails from any email address. Hopefully we will not get too much spam, slac has a good spam filter. I will respond to the bounced emails so all of you will have a chance to read them. Sorry about the problems. thanks, Jacek Jacek Becla wrote: > Hi all, > > It was suggested at the xldb workshop that we should > improve collaboration between science and db research > communities, in particular, we should try to organize > a working group & a mini-workshop with representatives > from different sciences and db research community to > discuss a common set of database-related requirements > and primitives that scientists need from next-generation > DBMS with the goals of stimulating database research > and eventually producing standardized benchmarks. > > We know from Mike's blog > http://www.databasecolumn.com/2007/11/databases-for-big-science.html > that the research community is still interested (great!), > and I think science is interested too, so let's make it > happen. > > I suggest we organize a _small_, focused mini-workshop > with representatives from > - astronomy (2-3) > - HEP (2-3) > - biology/medicine/neuro-science (2-3) > - earth science (1) > - db research (4-6) > - plus KT and myself (organizers). > That would be < 20 total. > > I do remember it was mentioned at the XLDB we might want > to invite few selected vendors to this meeting, could > someone explain what the thinking behind it was? I imagine > if we pick some (true) db researchers that happen to work > for a database vendor that might work well (maybe > Guy Lohman? Who else?), but otherwise I think for the > sake of keeping the meeting small and focused I'd be > tempted to leave the vendors out this time (sorry!). > > I know astronomy and HEP communities relatively well, > and I thought about inviting: > - Robert Lupton, Alex Szalay and Kirk Borne (astro) > - Dirk Duellmann, David Quarrie (hep) > I will need help with identifying solid representatives > from the remaining sciences, I'm counting on Nagiza (ORNL), > Celeste (LLNL) and others to help us. > > We'll expect science representatives to prepare white > papers in advance of the mini-workshop based on input > and materials from their colleagues describing prioritized > features and primitives her/his community would like > to see in a next-generation DBMS. These white papers > will serve as the basis for the workshop discussions. > > To kick off this process, we have prepared a draft > list of potential common requirements: > > http://xldb.slac.stanford.edu/display/XLDB/Common+Requirements > > We encourage everybody from science to add to it or > attach comments. > > We are proposing to meet late April or early May in > Asilomar (as discussed at XLDB), and we believe a > 2 day meeting would be most productive. > > Mike, David: I know you've organized many meetings and > conferences at Asilomar, can we count on your help with > arranging the logistics with Asilomar? > > And finally, given how severely the budget of entire > science was hit this year, it would tremendously help > if we would have some sponsors to offset the costs. > Given we are not planning to have representatives from > industry and vendors, I'm not sure what is the best > way to attract sponsors. > > Anyway, please send feedbacks, comments and suggestions > either to me or to the entire list. > > thanks, > Jacek and KT > -- Jacek Becla Stanford Linear Accelerator Center [log in to unmask] +1 650 926 8664