Opened 14 years ago

Last modified 9 years ago

#336 new enhancement

IZ1989: qsub -now y incorrectly submits to Interactive Queue

Reported by: pcarey Owned by:
Priority: normal Milestone:
Component: sge Version: 6.0u7
Severity: Keywords: scheduling
Cc:

Description

[Imported from gridengine issuezilla http://gridengine.sunsource.net/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=1989]

        Issue #:      1989             Platform:     All           Reporter: pcarey (pcarey)
       Component:     gridengine          OS:        All
     Subcomponent:    scheduling       Version:      6.0u7            CC:
                                                                             [_] reuti
                                                                             [_] Remove selected CCs
        Status:       NEW              Priority:     P3
      Resolution:                     Issue type:    ENHANCEMENT
                                   Target milestone: ---
      Assigned to:    andreas2 (andreas2)

                      This user has been disabled.
      QA Contact:     andreas
          URL:
       * Summary:     qsub -now y incorrectly submits to Interactive Queue
   Status whiteboard:
      Attachments:

     Issue 1989 blocks:
   Votes for issue 1989:


   Opened: Thu Feb 23 04:07:00 -0700 2006 
------------------------


Peter,

please file a CR for this.

I agree one can argue the way you do here.

Regards,
Andreas

On Thu, 23 Feb 2006 ext-peter.carey@nokia.com wrote:

> Hi Andreas,
>
> It may behave as expected but I'm questioning whether that behaviour s
correct especially when used with qsub.
>
>
>       A batch job runs in the background with no user interaction.
>
>       An interactive job can interact with the user.
>
> So submitting a batch job to the interactive queue is incorrect. Imagine if
people had special
> pre and post scripts for handling their interactive jobs.
>
> Complexities of programming must not enter the logical discussion. If you
agree with the
> above then clearly the current functionality is wrong. Now if looking at the
code it appears
> to be too complex to implement as the code or design is currently implemented
then at the very least
> it can be inserted in the man page and flagged as a RHE with a comment that
it requires too much
> reprogramming.
>
> Peter
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: ext Andreas Haas [mailto:Andreas.Haas@Sun.COM]
> Sent: Wednesday, February 22, 2006 3:50 PM
> To: Carey Peter (EXT-RDL/Southwood)
> Cc: Joachim Gabler
> Subject: Interactive and immediate jobs
>
>
> On Tue, 21 Feb 2006 ext-peter.carey@nokia.com wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > >>Actually a job with "-now y" is not interactive but
> > >>/immediate/. Is this still an issue for you?
> >
> > That's the intention but the job appears to be classed as Interactive for
submitting only to the Interactive queue.
> >
> >
> >
> > My queues are defined as follows:
> >
> >    batch.q              B     0/2
> >    interactive.q        I     0/2
> >    mda.q                P     0/2
> >
> > Therefore only Interactive jobs can enter the interactive queue.
>
> I agree this is a pitfal, but it behaves as expected.
>
>
> > job-ID  prior   name       user         state submit/start at
queue                          slots ja-task-ID
> > ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------
> >    1687 0.06049 sleep      pcarey       r     02/21/2006 16:50:47
interactive.q@fagem01              1
> >    1688 0.06049 sleep      pcarey       r     02/21/2006 16:50:54
interactive.q@fagem01              1
> >    1685 0.06049 sleep      pcarey       r     02/21/2006 16:50:31
interactive.q@fagem02              1
> >    1686 0.06049 sleep      pcarey       r     02/21/2006 16:50:40
interactive.q@fagem02              1
> >
> > If I submit more jobs I correctly get the following:
> >
> > $ qsub -now y -b y sleep 40
> > Your job 1689 ("sleep") has been submitted.
> > Waiting for immediate job to be scheduled.
> >
> > Your qsub request could not be scheduled, try again later.
> >
> >
> > My only point here is why does it go to interactive queue rather than batch
queue ?
>
> The only issue we got here is with terminology. There is some
> ambiguity with "interactive" and "immediate". Besides the pitfal
> it works as designed.
>
> Andreas
>

Andreas
--
http://www.drmaa.org/wiki/index.php/AndreasHaas

   ------- Additional comments from reuti Tue Apr 25 05:50:07 -0700 2006 -------
Added me to cc.

Change History (0)

Note: See TracTickets for help on using tickets.