<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=utf-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
great to have you in, Rob! Please allow me a few days until after
the holidays, I'll come back.<br>
-Peter<br>
<br>
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 05/15/2016 06:29 PM, Rob Emanuele
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CAFPWJ6fYzy0o8r6+OpZfYWz9bMPq-PSWZHGck9c=Zo6oxEsY2A@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
<div dir="ltr">Hi Peter,
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Thank you for the invitation. I have just registered, and
am looking forward to working with you.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Best,</div>
<div>Rob</div>
</div>
<div class="gmail_extra"><br>
<div class="gmail_quote">On Sun, May 15, 2016 at 12:20 PM, Peter
Baumann <span dir="ltr"><<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:p.baumann@jacobs-university.de"
target="_blank">p.baumann@jacobs-university.de</a>></span>
wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0
.8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000"> Hi Rob,<br>
<br>
excellent, now we are getting into technical discussion.<br>
<br>
I did not say that rasdaman is the best in the universe
under all possible constellations, but we do have both
theoretical considerations and practical results that
suggest that rasdaman performs outstandingly well on n-D
arrays.<br>
<br>
Your offer to participate is very welcome, and timely. We
have established the RDA Array Database Assessment WG, and
here we need as many volunteers as possible to undertake
this huge endeavour of getting reproducible knowledge
about the state of the art, best practices, etc. Here is
the page:<br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://www.rd-alliance.org/groups/array-database-working-group.html"
target="_blank">https://www.rd-alliance.org/groups/array-database-working-group.html</a><br>
<br>
Participation is at no cost and open, same the results.
Just register yourself with RDA and let me know so that we
canplan contributions.<br>
<br>
Looking forward to welcoming you on board,<br>
Peter
<div>
<div class="h5"><br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<div>On 05/15/2016 06:10 PM, Rob Emanuele wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div>Apologies for veering off topic.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
Hi Peter,
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Thanks for citing your resources.
Unfortunately I can't access the one paper,
since the only version I could find is behind a
paywall, and the bar chart you attached gives
very little information; from these I cannot
understand the methodology or results. If you
have more details I would be happy to look
further into this.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>My concern is with your wide sweeping
statements, and the implication that rasdaman
has been scientifically verified to be more
performant than any other system in all cases.
This to me feels hyperbolically similar to
measuring that a bowling ball falls faster than
a piece of paper when dropped from the roof of a
building and concluding that trees are the
objects which fall most slowly towards the
earth.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>For instance, I have doubts that those who
had conducted the quoted performance benchmarks
set up the Apache Spark system in a way that
represents all potential configurations. I work
on the GeoTrellis project [1], which adds raster
processing capabilities to Spark. I could for
instance imagine a system where raster data was
stored in Accumulo, indexed by GeoTrellis, and
processed through Spark, which is very fast
under many query types. I won't make any
assumptions on how fast as compared to other
systems, and it's very possible that rasdaman
will beat out such a system in a set of query
types, or perhaps all queries. However, it is my
opinion that until the two systems were compared
in such a way that everyone agreed on on the
methodology and the results, casually using the
"fact" that one system is "way faster" than the
other system, and that one beats the other "in
all benchmarks" as an argument for some
treatment from OSGeo (or for any other purpose)
deserves to be called into question, which I am
doing here.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>I'd be happy to collaborate to develop, out
in the open and in front of any paywalls, an
objective system of measuring performance
between systems. At which point in time we could
make proclamations like, "[whichever framework],
under [these specific query types], running on
[however many nodes, whatever type of hardware],
storing [this amount] of [this type of data],
performs better than [some other framework]
under the same conditions". Until then, I object
to your very broad statements of superiority.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Regards,</div>
<div>Rob</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>[1] <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://github.com/geotrellis/geotrellis"
target="_blank">https://github.com/geotrellis/geotrellis</a></div>
</div>
<div class="gmail_extra"><br>
<div class="gmail_quote">On Sun, May 15, 2016 at
9:30 AM, Moritz Lennert <span dir="ltr"><<a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:mlennert@club.worldonline.be"
target="_blank"><a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:mlennert@club.worldonline.be">mlennert@club.worldonline.be</a></a>></span>
wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0
0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc
solid;padding-left:1ex"><span>On 15/05/16
14:40, Marco Afonso wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote"
style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px
#ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"> Hi Anita,<br>
<br>
Aha! So there is a ponderation weight on
software quality evaluation AND<br>
project organization evaluation.<br>
<br>
So you can exclude an open source software
with high quality if their<br>
organization evaluation is low.<br>
<br>
For me that seems wrong. A software on a
public repository is only<br>
limited by it's licence terms, or
unlimited at all. :)<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
</span> But the discussion is not about
whether the software should be in a public
repository or not, or what the licence term
should be. The discussion is about what the
meaning of the "OSGeo project" label is.<br>
<br>
I don't think anyone has questioned the
quality of the software, here. However, one of
the aims of labeling a project an OSGeo
project is to give a certain level of
guarantee to potential users that this
software _project_ respects a series of
criteria that are considered important to
ensure a long-term sustainability of that
project. Putting one person's name in the
statutes of a project and designating that
person as the one who has ultimate decision
rights (even if these decisions are always
based on quality criteria), leaves the
question of what would happen if that person
lands under the proverbial bus.<br>
<br>
A more collective governance structure is seen
by many as more sustainable in the long run.
Similar debates have gone on for ages in
Debian, for example, about team-based
maintaining of packages vs individual
maintainers.<br>
<br>
What I personally haven't really understood,
yet, is what the rasdaman community is really
afraid of. If the community works as well as
described, why would the creation of a
PSC-like structure create such problems ?<span><font
color="#888888"><br>
<br>
Moritz</font></span>
<div>
<div><br>
_______________________________________________<br>
Discuss mailing list<br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:Discuss@lists.osgeo.org"
target="_blank">Discuss@lists.osgeo.org</a><br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss"
rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss</a></div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
</div>
<br>
<fieldset></fieldset>
<br>
<pre>_______________________________________________
Discuss mailing list
<a moz-do-not-send="true" href="mailto:Discuss@lists.osgeo.org" target="_blank">Discuss@lists.osgeo.org</a>
<a moz-do-not-send="true" href="http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss" target="_blank">http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss</a></pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
</div>
</div>
<span class="">
<pre cols="80">--
Dr. Peter Baumann
- Professor of Computer Science, Jacobs University Bremen
<a moz-do-not-send="true" href="http://www.faculty.jacobs-university.de/pbaumann" target="_blank">www.faculty.jacobs-university.de/pbaumann</a>
mail: <a moz-do-not-send="true" href="mailto:p.baumann@jacobs-university.de" target="_blank">p.baumann@jacobs-university.de</a>
tel: <a moz-do-not-send="true" href="tel:%2B49-421-200-3178" value="+494212003178" target="_blank">+49-421-200-3178</a>, fax: <a moz-do-not-send="true" href="tel:%2B49-421-200-493178" value="+49421200493178" target="_blank">+49-421-200-493178</a>
- Executive Director, rasdaman GmbH Bremen (HRB 26793)
<a moz-do-not-send="true" href="http://www.rasdaman.com" target="_blank">www.rasdaman.com</a>, mail: <a moz-do-not-send="true" href="mailto:baumann@rasdaman.com" target="_blank">baumann@rasdaman.com</a>
tel: 0800-rasdaman, fax: 0800-rasdafax, mobile: <a moz-do-not-send="true" href="tel:%2B49-173-5837882" value="+491735837882" target="_blank">+49-173-5837882</a>
"Si forte in alienas manus oberraverit hec peregrina epistola incertis ventis dimissa, sed Deo commendata, precamur ut ei reddatur cui soli destinata, nec preripiat quisquam non sibi parata." (mail disclaimer, AD 1083)
</pre>
</span></div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
<pre class="moz-signature" cols="80">--
Dr. Peter Baumann
- Professor of Computer Science, Jacobs University Bremen
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="http://www.faculty.jacobs-university.de/pbaumann">www.faculty.jacobs-university.de/pbaumann</a>
mail: <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:p.baumann@jacobs-university.de">p.baumann@jacobs-university.de</a>
tel: +49-421-200-3178, fax: +49-421-200-493178
- Executive Director, rasdaman GmbH Bremen (HRB 26793)
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="http://www.rasdaman.com">www.rasdaman.com</a>, mail: <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:baumann@rasdaman.com">baumann@rasdaman.com</a>
tel: 0800-rasdaman, fax: 0800-rasdafax, mobile: +49-173-5837882
"Si forte in alienas manus oberraverit hec peregrina epistola incertis ventis dimissa, sed Deo commendata, precamur ut ei reddatur cui soli destinata, nec preripiat quisquam non sibi parata." (mail disclaimer, AD 1083)
</pre>
</body>
</html>