[DRMAA-WG] Blocking drmaa_run_job()

[Rajic, Hrabri]

I would also prefer that either we are redundantly verbose or that we
reference the part that has been conveyed elsewhere (in the same
document).
That is the problem with at least one of the Torgue/PBS DRMAA
Experimental document issues.

Since the spec has been already labeled as the most boring document we
have to make sure to keep improving it in that direction:-).

Hrabri

>
>This is another case where the intent is perfectly clear if you're one
>of the five authors, but for anyone else it's not so clear.  One could
>infer from the fact that there are explicit synchronization routines
>that the job submission routines should be non-blocking, but I could
>also make a pretty good argument in the other direction as well.  There
>is no clear statement in the spec as to the intended behavior of the
job
>submission routines.  A new DRMAA implementation could make
>drmaa_run_job() blocking and drmaa_run_bulk_jobs() non-blocking and
>still be compliant with the DRMAA specification.
>
>I recommend that we add, as Roger said, a single sentence to the
spec(s)
>saying explicitly that the job submission routines must return as soon
>as the job *submission* is complete.  Or maybe we could state it in the
>negative: the job submission routines must not block waiting for the
>submitted job(s) to end.  Either way, explicit is better than implied.
>
>Daniel
>
>Rajic, Hrabri wrote:
>> Changing the semantics of the DRMAA API via native_specification!?!
>>
>> Quite interesting.
>>
>> Hrabri
>>
>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: drmaa-wg-bounces at ogf.org [mailto:drmaa-wg-bounces at ogf.org] On
>>>
>> Behalf
>>
>>> Of Roger Brobst
>>> Sent: Thursday, May 17, 2007 10:52 AM
>>> To: Daniel Templeton
>>> Cc: DRMAA Working Group
>>> Subject: Re: [DRMAA-WG] Blocking drmaa_run_job()
>>>
>>>
>>> If the intent of the DRMAA API was unclear,
>>> we should add a sentence.
>>>
>>> My suspicion is that intent was clear, but the
>>> DRMAA(SGE) user was confused why "-sync y"
>>> didn't work.
>>>
>>> -Roger
>>>
>>> ----Original Message----
>>> From: Daniel Templeton <Dan.Templeton at Sun.COM>
>>> Sender: drmaa-wg-bounces at ogf.org
>>> To: DRMAA Working Group <drmaa-wg at gridforum.org>
>>> Subject: [DRMAA-WG] Blocking drmaa_run_job()
>>> Date: Wed, 16 May 2007 23:24:12 -0700
>>>
>>> All,
>>>
>>> I just had a discussion on the SGE mailing list that should probably
be
>>> a tracker for the IDL spec.  A user attempted to use the "-sync y"
>>> option in the DRMAA native specification attribute, and was confused
as
>>> to why it didn't work.  -sync tells the SGE qsub command to block
until
>>> the job finishes.  The user wanted to bypass the drmaa_wait() call
by
>>> doing a blocking drmaa_run_job() call.  I looked through the DRMAA
spec
>>> and the IDL spec, and neither actually declares whether the job
>>> submission routines should return before the job completes or not.
>>> That's probably an important detail that should be included.
>>>
>>> Daniel
>>> --
>>>  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