[saga-rg] job states...

[Christopher Smith]

It makes sense to keep the state models in sync.

-- Chris


On 10/2/06 18:26, "Andre Merzky" <andre at merzky.net> wrote:

> Quoting [Christopher Smith] (Feb 11 2006):
>> 
>> What I meant by that comment is that where it is a subset, it should reflect
>> the BES terminology. I think that the number of states represented is enough
>> already. ;-)
> 
> Would it make sense to just copy the BES state diagram?
> 
> It did not exist when we (== you ;-) drafted the SAGA job
> states - if it would have been around then, we might have
> had copied it already.
> 
> Apart from the SystemXXX/UserXXX states, and from Hold,
> it is not that much different from the SAGA model anyway.
> 
> Cheers, Andre.
> 
> 
>> -- Chris
>> 
>> 
>> On 10/2/06 17:30, "Andre Merzky" <andre at merzky.net> wrote:
>> 
>>> Hi Chris, 
>>> 
>>> many thanks for the answers! :-)
>>> 
>>>> By the way ... I believe that the state diagram should at least be a subset
>>>> of the BES state diagram ... we should adopt the same names.
>>> 
>>> I agree, kind of - I would say that the SAGA job state
>>> diagram should at _most_ be subset of the BES state diagram.
>>> It could be _S_implier :-)
>>> 
>>> Cheers, Andre.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Quoting [Christopher Smith] (Feb 10 2006):
>>>> Date: Fri, 10 Feb 2006 13:41:18 -0800
>>>> Subject: Re: [saga-rg] job states...
>>>> From: Christopher Smith <csmith at platform.com>
>>>> To: Simple API for Grid Applications WG <saga-rg at ggf.org>
>>>> 
>>>> On 4/2/06 11:18, "Andre Merzky" <andre at merzky.net> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> Ok ... I'll try to answer these, at least from my viewpoint.
>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> I think that diagram is wrong, isn't it?  Well, here are my
>>>>> questions:
>>>>> 
>>>>>   - if we submit a job, its immediately Queued - is that
>>>>>     right?  Should it be pending before (e.g. as long as the
>>>>>     queuing request travels the middleware layers)?
>>>>> 
>>>> To me, Queued is the same as Pending. Pending is probably a better word for
>>>> this. Can't remember where the Queued name came from, as LSF uses PEND.
>>>> 
>>>>>   - can the hold and suspend states reached only from
>>>>>     'Running', or from elsewhere as well?
>>>>> 
>>>> You can only go into a Hold state from Pending, I think, or directly into
>>>> Hold on submission.
>>>> 
>>>>>   - What is the difference between 'Hold' and 'Suspend'?
>>>>> 
>>>> A Hold state tells the scheduler/broker not to consider this job for
>>>> scheduling/dispatch until the hold is explicitly released.
>>>> 
>>>>>   - Are there signals defined (apart from KILL) which shange
>>>>>     the job state?  I guess that is not as simple as saying
>>>>>     SUSP does suspend - that state is probably defined by
>>>>>     the scheduler, not by the OS...
>>>>> 
>>>> Right ... this is implementation dependent on the mechanism used to suspend
>>>> a job (might be a signal, might be some other mechanism). What is important
>>>> is that there is an operation to initiate the state transition.
>>>> 
>>>>>   - What is the use case for distinguishing between UserHold
>>>>>     and SystemHold, or between UserSuspend and
>>>>>     SystemSuspend?
>>>>>    
>>>> If I preempt workload, the system will put it into a SystemSuspend state
>>>> that a user cannot cause a switch out of, otherwise a system may become
>>>> oversubscribed due to the preempted and preempting jobs running at the same
>>>> time. A UserSuspend can be entered and exited by the user, and is often
>>>> used
>>>> to hold processing to check progress, etc.
>>>>  
>>>> 
>>>> By the way ... I believe that the state diagram should at least be a subset
>>>> of the BES state diagram ... we should adopt the same names.
>>>> 
>>>> -- Chris
>>> 
>>> 
> 
>