Context Navigation

Changes between Version 5 and Version 6 of LEGACY - LAMP proposal

-              v5
+              v6
   * The level of management might need to vary. Take test systems. This could be Unit testing, Integration testing, or Acceptance testing. I can see this range of testing being required where the management side of a live system is complicated. See next point.
   * Whoever manages the i2b2 data warehouse (University or UHLT), the live systems cannot be managed in isolation. The two systems must be synchronized in some way. A failure on one side will have ramifications for the other.
+  * The i2b2 side can support numbers of projects and within a project, numbers of ontologies. What constitutes a project is open to debate, but a good first idea is to take a source/stream of data (eg: the Onyx questionnaire) as a project. Now each project has its own set of SQL tables, and each ontology within a single project can have one or more ontology SQL tables. So one could expect over time that a live system would change the number of SQL tables within its remit, which would suppose some DBA activity. Who would own that activity?
+I cannot see a simple way through this wood at the moment. If I were asked to manage a system, I would like to have some say before I took it over, even if it were only to vet and test the procedures.
+=== Acquisition of VMs ===
+It seems unlikely there will be creation and access to new VM's on demand. So there would need to be some forward planning of what is required for a given future period.