* Markus Metz <[email protected]> [2018-02-24 21:39:40 +0100]:

On Sat, Feb 24, 2018 at 9:25 PM, Nikos Alexandris <[email protected]>
wrote:

Dear community,

I am asking for help to "debug" a situation.

One ETRS89-based location, one Mapset with hundreds of land cover raster
map tiles.

Then, hundreds of UTM Zones-based Locations, subset of the WRS2 grid.

Multiple `r.proj`es are running in parallel. However, only one at a time
from inside one Mapset inside the respective UTM-Zone-based Location,
requesting for one land cover raster map tile from the ETRS89-based
Location.

And, each `r.proj` is isolated running inside an independent docker
container.

To the question. Some tiles are cross-cut by more than one UTM-Zone.
Hence, it happens that many UTM-Zones will/might request to read the
same land cover raster map tile at the same time.

That is one write per target Mapset/Location, yet highly probable
concurrent read requests to the same raster map(s) in the source
Mapset/Location.

Is this bad?

Are you experiencing problems?

Yes.

(It's not easy for me to have access to the logs, as I
don't directly have access to the scheduler. I got a copy though and I
am reading through.)

Looking at jobs logs, I read lots of ".gislock" lines.
It might be some permission related issue. I partially operated directly
(with my user-id) on many Locations.

The operateor of the scheduler, has naturally, another user-id. I wonder
if I should apply GRASS_SKIP_MAPSET_OWNER_CHECK=1 everywhere.

I have been using concurrent read requests on the same raster maps on
different HPC systems for quite a few years by now and never got any
problems.

Thank you Markusi. This is a very useful piece of information. It's
reassuring that this part of the process is ok and the problem lies elsewhere.

Concurrent write requests would be a different issue.

Markus M

None here.

Nikos

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

_______________________________________________
grass-user mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/grass-user

Reply via email to