[DRMAA-WG] Torque/PBS DRMAA -DRMAA_ERRNO_ATTRIBUTE_NOT_IMPLEMENTED issue
hrabri.rajic at intel.com
Tue May 8 11:23:23 CDT 2007
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
Do you have any questions, clarifications, or comments to add?
>From: drmaa-wg-bounces at ogf.org [mailto:drmaa-wg-bounces at ogf.org] On
>Of Peter Troeger
>Sent: Friday, May 04, 2007 11:23 AM
>To: DRMAA Working Group
>Subject: Re: [DRMAA-WG] Torque/PBS DRMAA -
>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 ;-)
>Am 02.05.2007 um 16:32 schrieb Rajic, Hrabri:
>> Minimal completeness and spec stability issues needs to be
>> 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
>> Lightweight and workable process is what we need.
>> Touching the subject with Greg Newby and our ADs could be a good
>> after we get an agreement internally.
>> Taking the name from the IDL spec is probably the way to go.
>>> -----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.
>>> On May 1, 2007, at 7:13 PM, Rajic, Hrabri wrote:
>>>> In some cases it might be really hard or even impossible to
>>>> some of the mandatory DRMAA attributes. For different DRMS this
>>>> vary. We therefore suggest adding a new error code to the
>>>> This value could be returned by drmaa_set_attribute() and
>>>> Furthermore, in case of future development of DRMAA, it might be
>>>> to introduce optional routines and therefore
>>>> error code could come in handy. One use of such an error code could
>>>> 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
>>>> drmaa-wg mailing list
>>>> drmaa-wg at ogf.org
>> drmaa-wg mailing list
>> drmaa-wg at ogf.org
> drmaa-wg mailing list
> drmaa-wg at ogf.org
More information about the drmaa-wg