[jsdl-wg] alternate view of Andreas's allocation model scenario

[Andreas Savva]

Donal K. Fellows wrote:
> Karl Czajkowski wrote:
> 
>> The distinction of 1 vs. 2 and 2 vs. 3 are not even on the same
>> conceptual "axis"!
> 
> [...]
> 
>> Where is the line drawn
>> between "background system processes I will ignore" and "other
>> processes that annoy me"?  I think this requires some more precise QoS
>> terminology in the job description.
> 
> 
> I'm wondering what is the minimum we can describe in order to get a
> nicely usable JSDL 1.0 spec is? I do not mind if there are distinctions
> that we omit for 1.0 on the grounds of getting the spec done sooner
> rather than later, but I'll merrily admit to not understanding all the
> ramifications of the processor allocation models. Simple to describe and
> simple to implement feel like key goals to aim for to me. :-)
> 
> In other words, let us finalize a version for 1.0 and then revisit the
> area in more detail later on if it is warranted.
> 

Right. I would be satisfied with a suitably named(*) attribute/element 
in the 'Resource' section that allows me to make the distinction I 
described; and if not present defaults to the behaviour Karl wants.

This isn't an attempt to wreak havoc on people's resource allocation 
policies or somehow bring the grid to a grinding halt. :-)

(*) Sorry it's been a long day (and week) and I have no facility to come 
up with suitable names at the moment.
-- 
Andreas Savva
Fujitsu Laboratories Ltd