From Grid Islands to a World Wide Grid

  • P. Kacsuk
  • T. Kiss
Conference paper


The World Wide Web has become a phenomenon that now influences our everyday life in any possible areas and disciplines. This chapter describes a potential roadmap establishing its grid equivalent, a scientific, workflow-oriented, computational World Wide Grid (WWG). In order to achieve such a WWG, this chapter suggests three major steps. First, create uniform meta-brokers and connect existing production grids by them in order to form the WWG infrastructure where existing production grids become interoperable at the level of job submission. Second, create workflow-oriented, advanced grid portals and connect them to the meta-brokers in order to exploit workflow level grid interoperability. Finally, create workflow grid services and their registry and repository in order to make the workflows developed by different workflow communities interoperable and shareable.


Meta-broker Grid portal Grid workflow World Wide Grid 



This research work has been carried out under the FP6 Network of Excellence CoreGRID funded by the European Commission (Contract IST-2002-004265).


  1. 1.
    A. Anjomshoaa, F. Brisard, M. Drescher, D. Fellows, A. Ly, S. McGough, D. Pulsipher, and A. Savva. Job Submission Description Language (JSDL) Specification, Version 1.0.
  2. 2.
    M.D. Assuncao, R. Buyya, and S. Venugopal. InterGrid: A case for internetworking islands of grids. In Concurrency and Computation: Practice and Experience (CCPE), Wiley Press, New York, USA, Jul. 16 2007. Online ISSN: 1532-0634, Print ISSN: 1532-0626.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    R. Barbera, A. Falzone, and A. Rodolico. The genius grid portal. In Computing in High Energy and Nuclear Physics, La Jolla, California, 24–28 Mar. 2003.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    N. Bobroff, L. Fong, S. Kalayci, Y. Liu, J.C. Martinez, I. Rodero, S.M. Sadjadi, and D. Villegas. Enabling interoperability among meta-schedulers. In Cluster Computing and the Grid, 2008. CCGRID ‘08. 8th IEEE International Symposium on, pp. 306–315, May 2008.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    D. Churches, G. Gombas, A. Harrison, J. Maassen, C. Robinson, M. Shields, I. Taylor, and I. Wang. Programming scientific and distributed workflow with triana services. Grid Workflow 2004, Concurrency and Computation: Practice and Experience, 18(10):1021–1037, Aug. 2006. ISSN: 1532-0626.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    W. Cirne, F. Brasileiro, N. Andrade, L. Costa, A. Andrade, R. Novaes, and M. Mowbray. Labs of the World, Unite!!! Journal of Grid Computing, 4(3):225–246, 2006.MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    P.V. Coveney, M.J. Harvey, and L. Pedesseau. Development and deployment of an application hosting environment for grid based computational science. In Conference of the Proceedings of the UK E-Science All Hands Meeting, pp. 874–881, Nottingham, UK, 19–22 Sep. 2005. ISBN 1-904425-534.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    T. Delaitre, T. Kiss, A. Goyeneche, G. Terstyanszky, S. Winter, and P. Kacsuk. GEMLCA: Running legacy code applications as grid services. Journal of Grid Computing, 3(1–2):75–90, 2005.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    S.R. Egglestone, M.N. Alpdemir, C. Greenhalgh, A. Mukherjee, and I. Roberts. A Portal Interface to myGrid Workflow Technology.
  10. 10.
    D.W. Erwin and D.F. Snelling. UNICORE: A grid computing environment. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 2150:825–834, 2001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
  12. 12.
  13. 13.
    Grid Economy project.
  14. 14.
  15. 15.
    GT 2.4: The Globus Resource Specification Language RSL v1.0.
  16. 16.
  17. 17.
    M. Jones, E.A. Lee, and Y. Zhao. Scientific workflow management and the Kepler system. Concurrency and Computation: Practice and Experience, 18(10):1039–1065, Aug. 2006. ISSN 1532-0626.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    P. Kacsuk, A. Kertesz, and T. Kiss. Can we connect existing production grids into a world wide grid? Submitted to the VECPAR ‘08. In 8th International Meeting on High Performance Computing for Computational Science, Toulouse, France, 24–27 June, 2008.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    P. Kacsuk, T. Kiss, and G. Sipos. Solving the grid interoperability problem by P-GRADE portal at workflow level. In Proceedings of the GELA‘2006 Workshop in Conjunction with HPDC‘06, Paris, 2006.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    P. Kacsuk and G. Sipos. Multi-grid, Multi-user workflows in the P–GRADE grid portal. Journal of Grid Computing, 3(3–4):221–238, 2005.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    A. Kertesz and P. Kacsuk. Grid meta-broker architecture: Towards an interoperable grid resource brokering service. In CoreGRID Workshop on Grid Middleware in conjunction with Euro–Par 2006, pp. 112–116, Dresden, Germany, Aug. 28–29, 2006. Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    A. Kertesz and P. Kacsuk. Meta-broker for future generation grids: A new approach for a high-level interoperable resource management. In CoreGRID Workshop on Grid Middleware in Conjunction with ISC‘07 Conference, Dresden, Germany, Jun. 25–26, 2007.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    A. Kertesz, I. Rodero, and F. Guim. Data model for describing grid resource broker capabilities. In CoreGRID Workshop on Grid Middleware in Conjunction with ISC‘07 Conference, Dresden, Germany, Jun. 25–26, 2007.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    A. Kertesz, I. Rodero, and F. Guim. Meta-Brokering requirements and research directions in state-of-the-art grid resource management. Technical Report TR-0116, Institute on Resource Management and Scheduling, CoreGRID – Network of Excellence, Nov. 2007.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    I. Foster and C. Kesselman. The globus project: A status report. In Proceedings of the Heterogeneous Computing Workshop, pp. 4–18. IEEE Computer Society Press, 1998.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    J. Novotny, R. Manansala, and T. Nguyen. BIRN portal overview. In Portals & Portlets 2006, Edinburgh, UK, 17–18 Jul. 2006.
  27. 27.
    T. Oinn, M. Addis, J. Ferris, D. Marvin, T. Carver, M.R. Pocock, and A. Wipat. Taverna: A tool for the composition and enactment of bioinformatics workflows. Bioinformatics Journal, 20(17):3045–3054, Jun. 2004.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    A. Oleksiak, A. Tullo, P. Graham, T. Kuczyński, J. Nabrzyski, D. Szejnfeld, and T. Sloan. HPC–Europa single point of access as a framework for building science gateways. Concurrency and Computation: Practice and Experience, 19(6):851–866, 2006.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    OMII–Europe Project.
  30. 30.
  31. 31.
    The NorduGrid website.
  32. 32.
  33. 33.
    The TeraGrid website.
  34. 34.
    H.-L. Truong, B. Baliś, M. Bubak, J. Dziwisz, Th. Fahringer, and A. Hoheisel. K–WfGrid distributed monitoring and performance analysis services for workflows in the grid. In 2nd IEEE International Conference on e–Science and Grid Computing, IEEE, Amsterdam, 2006.Google Scholar
  35. 35.
  36. 36.
    G. von Laszewski, K. Amin, M. Hategan, N.J. Zaluzec, S. Hampton, and A. Rossi. GridAnt: A Client–Controllable Grid Workflow System.–gridant-hics.pdf
  37. 37.
    B. Wassermann, W. Emmerich, and B. Butchart Sedna. A BPEL-based environment for visual scientific workflow modelling. Workflows for e–Science, pp. 428–449, 2007.Google Scholar
  38. 38.
  39. 39.
    World Wide Grid testbed.

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.MTA SZTAKI Lab. of Parallel and Distributed SystemsBudapestHungary
  2. 2.Centre for Parallel Computing, School of Informatics, University of WestminsterWestminsterUK

Personalised recommendations