[TRACE-X]⭐🚀 Switch to IRS Order API for scalable Job Processing

[mkanal]

Overview

Explain the topic in 2 sentences

Trace-X currently utilizes a Job API that processes each job individually, resulting in limited scalability.
By integrating the IRS Order API, irs processes multiple jobs in batches, allowing for parallel processing of twins, thereby improving overall system efficiency and scalability.

What's the benefit?

Usage of IRS Order API which is designed to process big amount of data and focussing more on performance.

What are the Risks/Dependencies ?

• Nothing to report

Detailed explanation

Trace-X to switch from the current Job API to the IRS Order API,

Current implementation

Trace-X used current Job API

Proposed improvements

Trace-X used IRS Order API

Feature Team

Contributor

• Cofinity-X @rogocof
• Cofinity-X @mkanal

Committer

• @ds-jhartmann
• @ds-mwesener
• @ds-lcapellino

---

Current State:

Trace-X currently utilizes a Job API that processes each job individually, resulting in limited scalability.

By integrating the IRS Order API, irs processes multiple jobs in batches, allowing for parallel processing of twins, thereby improving overall system efficiency and scalability.

User Story

As a customer
I want Trace-X to switch from the current Job API to the IRS Order API,
so that we can achieve scalable job processing by enabling batch processing of multiple twins in parallel.

Hint

{
  ..
  "jobTimeout": 3600,
 ...
  "timeout": 43200
}

Acceptance Criteria

• Trace-X uses IRS Order API for retrieving assets.
• Trace-X handles batches results by irs in a sufficient way and handles error situations sufficiently.
• Trace-X handles and monitors order status to ensure that all transferred twins have been processed
• Trace-X tries to cancel orders if defined thresholds of 12 h is reached. PUT /irs/order/{id}
• Performance metrics should demonstrate improved job processing times compared to the existing individual job processing approach.
• Ensure that the new batch processing in Trace-X is reliable and handles errors gracefully.
• Execute and document a benchmark test after implementation in Confluence

---

Test Cases

Test Case 1

Steps

1. Do something
2. Click something
3. Add something

Expected Result

1. Expectation
2. Expectation
3. Expectation

Architectural Relevance

The following items are ensured (answer: yes) after this issue is implemented:

• This feature aligns with our current architectural guidelines
  • Data Sovereignty: All data sharing activities across company boundaries follow the Catena-X Regulatory Framework, in particular the Data Exchange Governance, and the Dataspace Protocol via a compliant Connector (like the tractusx-edc or similar, see Connector KIT)
    • CX-0010 Business Partner Number
    • CX-0013 Identity of Member Companies
    • CX-0018 Data Space Connectivity (EDC)
    • CX-0049 DID Document Schema
    • CX-0050 Framework Agreement Credential
    • CX-0149 Verified Company Identity
  • Interoperability: Digital Twins are used (compliant to the Digital Twin KIT and the Industry Core KIT)
    • CX-0001 EDC Discovery API
    • CX-0002 Digital Twins in Catena-X
    • CX-0018 Data Space Connectivity (EDC)
  • Data Format:
    • The data model is based on a published Semantic Model
• The impact on the overall system architecture has been assessed. The Feature does not require changes to the architecture or any existing standard? Please have a look here on the overarching architecture
• Potential risks or conflicts with existing architecture has been assessed

Justification: (Fill this out, if at least one of the checkboxes above cannot be ticked. Contact the Architecture Management Committee to get an approval for the justification)

Additional information

• I am aware that my request may not be developed if no developer can be found for it. I'll try to contribute a developer (bring your own developer)

[stephanbcbauer]

Some hints from Release Management (@ther3sa) and Tractus-X Project Lead (@stephanbcbauer)

• Status currently in Backlog -> Since for Backlog some requirements are missing ... please update them
• Please add missing sections from the feature template, or fill them out
• Please add assignee (overall responsible person who drives the feature)