Page tree
Skip to end of metadata
Go to start of metadata


Working Group

Performance and Scale Working Group (PSWG)

Working Group Health

The PSWG published the Metrics Document late last year.  This provides low level metric definitions that should apply to most DLT implementations. (Latency, throughput, etc)

The group is now going to "move up the stack" and define metrics that pertain to general use cases (verticals).  We have started to focus on supply chain and look to define basic performance and scalability measurements for that area. We reached out to the community a few weeks ago and received a lot of positive energy. Now we need to follow up. We also need to reach out specifically to project Grid and there are rumors of a Supply Chain SIG that we will also explore common areas with.

In January 2019 we also had a call with STAC. STAC is a for profit organization focused on performance in the securities and financial space.  The goal of our interaction is to see if there is some common ground between Hyperledger and STAC and look for areas of cooperation. If we (PSWG) proceed down this path, we will also need to look at the specific use cases that would pertain to the STAC members. We will also reach out to the Hyperledger Financial SIGs as appropriate.

The group has maintained a core of eight regular participants spread across the globe and across many companies and academia. The discussions remain very technical and perhaps we get too deep. We continue to reach outside of the Hyperledger community and have regular contributions and feedback on our work from this population.

Issues

If we proceed with STAC there is concern about being able to get everything done. We discussed the need to increase participants via direct recruiting or leveraging other Hyperledger activities (SIGs, projects, WGs), or drop the supply chain effort for now.  Because of this, the Supply Chain effort has been intentionally slowed a bit, which in hindsight is probably an error on my part.

Overall Activity in the Past Quarter

Due to holidays , winter breaks, and vacation schedules, meetings have been less frequent but that will change now as we get into the doldrums of February.  There was also a natural slowdown due to publishing our Metric Document.  Overall the group has been active and there have been many discussions on what to do next. We decided on defining metrics metrics for supply chain.

Planned Work Products

At this point we need to move forward with our supply chain work. This will also get more involved with other Hyperledger efforts.

We will also continue to pursue the STAC relationship. This will get us involved with the external community and help make Hyperledger visible to the STAC members. We will also work with Hyperledger activities focused in the financial and securities space.

The output of any of this work will be to define metrics that apply to the specific verticals and use cases.

Participant Diversity

This is a very active and diverse group of people from North America, Europe, and Russia. As mentioned above, we have a good mix of companies and folks from academia. From a gender diversity perspective, It is mainly male with an occasional female participant. We received positive feedback on the shout out for help with Supply Chain and should and see an increase in participation from that effort.

Additional Information

Reviewed By

  • Arnaud Le Hors
  • Baohua Yang
  • Binh Nguyen
  • Christopher Ferris
  • Dan Middleton
  • Hart Montgomery
  • Kelly Olson
  • Mark Wagner
  • Mic Bowman
  • Nathan George
  • Silas Davis


  • No labels

7 Comments

  1. Does it make sense to establish your metrics as some form of "standard"? Given the Hyperledger is focused more on technology than standards, what organization would be the right one to push that forward?

    1. Hmm, it is something that we should probably look into. Are you thinking something like NIST, ITU, EEA, or SPEC ?

      I think we would also need to look at involvement over time with the chosen organization. Do we hand it off and walk away or continue participating ?

      STAC could be a trial run for this...


  2. Do we need to worry about the legal framework to work with STAC?

    Asking for a lawyer friend (wink)

    1. Hyperledger staff has been involved from the start. We have had them in the loop for the initial call and emails. But if both sides to go deeper, I would think that there will need to be some type of legal agreement.  So tell your friend, "most likely".

  3. reviewed. To Mic’s point, I think ultimately we will need a formal standard benchmark maintained by some legit org like NIST or STAC.

  4. How aligned are the reports coming out of caliper with the metrics defined by the PSWG?

    1. At last check (several months ago), they were in alignment. The Caliper team has been participating in the PSWG.