On Thu, Aug 8, 2013 at 3:36 PM, Guido Trotter <[email protected]> wrote:

> On Thu, Aug 8, 2013 at 1:55 PM, Michele Tartara <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> > On Thu, Aug 8, 2013 at 1:44 PM, Jose A. Lopes <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> >>
> >> > What happens if a job terminates while LuxiD is not available?  And
> >> > what if a job finishes before LuxiD is back?
> >>
> >> Am I missing something here or do these questions seem to be same ?
> >
> >
> > They are two parts of the same scenario, but the first one was actually
> > meant to be "if a job is running while". Sorry, my fault typing.
> >
> >>
> >> What about the following:
> >>
> >> * if the job process has no message to deliver or locks to release,
> >>   then it terminates and goes away
> >
> >
> > Possible, but quite unlikely. Most jobs have some kind of lock, if they
> > modify the state of the cluster in some way.
> >
> >>
> >>
> >> * if the job process has a message or locks to release, or something
> >>   else to give the master, then it can wait for LuxiD to become
> >>   available and then deliver the message, or release the locks, etc...
> >>
> >> What do you think ?
> >
> >
> > It's possible, but keeping processes running seems to me much
> > resource-heavier than having a bunch of (extremely small) unix sockets on
> > the disk for some time.
> >
>
> How about we take this to the whiteboard? :) We have a slot tomorrow
> morning, where we could discuss freely.
>

I'll not be there tomorrow, but feel free to do it and to report the result
here. :-)

Michele

-- 
Google Germany GmbH
Dienerstr. 12
80331 München

Registergericht und -nummer: Hamburg, HRB 86891
Sitz der Gesellschaft: Hamburg
Geschäftsführer: Graham Law, Christine Elizabeth Flores

Reply via email to