[DRMAA-WG] Torque/PBS DRMAA -DRMAA_ERRNO_ATTRIBUTE_NOT_IMPLEMENTED issue

[Rajic, Hrabri]

This particular issue could also be resolved by introducing an optional
error, so no existing implementations would be broken.

The more pressing issue is how to deal with un-implementable mandatory
DRMAA attributes.   It is best to leave this issue for the next DRMAA
call.

Chris,

Do you have any questions, clarifications, or comments to add?


Regards

	Hrabri


>-----Original Message-----
>From: drmaa-wg-bounces at ogf.org [mailto:drmaa-wg-bounces at ogf.org] On
Behalf
>Of Peter Troeger
>Sent: Friday, May 04, 2007 11:23 AM
>To: DRMAA Working Group
>Subject: Re: [DRMAA-WG] Torque/PBS DRMAA -
>DRMAA_ERRNO_ATTRIBUTE_NOT_IMPLEMENTED issue
>
>This should be a two-step process. First, we need to clarify all
>presented issues in the next phone conference. The result should be
>some new tracker items.
>
>With the resulting final list of "postponed" issues, we can agree how
>the successor document is named or created. There should be tons of
>meeting minutes for similar discussions in the past ;-)
>
>Peter.
>
>
>
>Am 02.05.2007 um 16:32 schrieb Rajic, Hrabri:
>
>> Minimal completeness and spec stability issues needs to be
reconciled.
>> Keeping a 1.1 Errata list and agreeing on a window of time when to
>> switch to 1.1 implementations could be one way to go.  That needs
>> to be
>> coordinated with all implementation providers, especially the
>> commercial
>> ones.
>> Lightweight and workable process is what we need.
>>
>> Touching the subject with Greg Newby and our ADs could be a good
idea,
>> after we get an agreement internally.
>>
>> Taking the name from the IDL spec is probably the way to go.
>>
>> Hrabri
>>
>>
>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Dan.Templeton at Sun.COM [mailto:Dan.Templeton at Sun.COM]
>>> Sent: Tuesday, May 01, 2007 10:45 PM
>>> To: Rajic, Hrabri
>>> Cc: drmaa-wg at ogf.org
>>> Subject: Re: [DRMAA-WG] Torque/PBS DRMAA -
>>> DRMAA_ERRNO_ATTRIBUTE_NOT_IMPLEMENTED issue
>>>
>>> Actually, I think we added this in the IDL spec already, but it's
>>> called DRMAA_ERRNO_UNSUPPORTED_ATTRIBUTE.  Or something like that.
>>>
>>> Daniel
>>>
>>> On May 1, 2007, at 7:13 PM, Rajic, Hrabri wrote:
>>>
>>>> Issue:
>>>>
>>>> In some cases it might be really hard or even impossible to
>>>> implement
>>>> some of the mandatory DRMAA attributes. For different DRMS this
>>>> could
>>>> vary. We therefore suggest adding a new error code to the
>>>> specification:
>>>> DRMAA_ERRNO_ATTRIBUTE_NOT_IMPLEMENTED.
>>>> This value could be returned by drmaa_set_attribute() and
>>>> drmaa_set_vector_attribute().
>>>>
>>>> Furthermore, in case of future development of DRMAA, it might be
>>>> desired
>>>> to introduce optional routines and therefore
>>>> DRMAA_ERRNO_NOT_IMPLEMENTED
>>>> error code could come in handy. One use of such an error code could
>>>> when
>>>> using drmaa_control() one tries to request a job state change not
>>>> feasible in specific DRMS.
>>>> -------------
>>>>
>>>> This seems like a very good idea.   Since it is coming late in the
>>>> process, I suggest we target the recommendation for DRMAA 1.1
>>>> Errata.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> -Hrabri
>>>> --
>>>>   drmaa-wg mailing list
>>>>   drmaa-wg at ogf.org
>>>>   http://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/drmaa-wg
>> --
>>   drmaa-wg mailing list
>>   drmaa-wg at ogf.org
>>   http://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/drmaa-wg
>
>--
>  drmaa-wg mailing list
>  drmaa-wg at ogf.org
>  http://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/drmaa-wg