[drmaa-wg] Simultaneous waits on the same job id?

[Daniel Templeton]

Ed,

What Andreas is trying to get at is that since synchronize() doesn't 
return job information, so multiple simultaneous synchronize() calls 
will all succeed.  Even if synchronize() reaps job info, since other 
calls to synchronize() don't care whether they actually are able to find 
the job info, it's all good.  As long as synchronize() is running, 
reaped jobs are viewed as simply having ended, so not even a call to 
wait() will cause a call to synchronize() to fail.

Is that really correct?  Can anyone else confirm?  I think we should 
probably have a tracker to clarify that point in the (g2) spec.

Daniel

Andreas.Haas at Sun.COM wrote:
> On Fri, 23 Jun 2006, Ed Baskerville wrote:
>
>> OK, I'll do that. But one more question: how do these issues apply to 
>> synchronize? Consider the following sequence:
>>
>> thread 1: wait(job id 5)
>> thread 2: synchronize(job ids 5,6,7)
>> [job id 5 finishes]
>> ¿thread 2 synchronize call fails?
>> [job id 7 finishes]
>> [job id 6 finishes]
>> ¿thread 2 synchronize call succeeds?
>>
>> Should synchronize fail with INVALID_JOB as soon as any of the ids 
>> it's waiting on are reaped? Or should it eventually succeed?
>
> There is no reason for synchronize to fail, as long as none of the 
> jobs was reaped when synchronize() gets issued.
>
> Andreas