On Fri, 18 Nov 2011 06:44:24 -0800 Danny Auble <[email protected]> wrote:
> Yuri, > > You might want to reconsider your choice for storage plugin. The postgres > plugin hasn't been maintained for quite sometime, and only contains a > fraction of functionality the mysql plugin brings. The original authors have > already abandoned it as well. With that said we will accept patches on the > current code like you have sent, but I just wanted to warn you before you go > too far down this path and wonder why things don't work the way you would > expect. Ok, that's good to know. Is this written somewhere or did I miss it? If the storage module is somewhat deprecated then it doesn't make much sense to keep it. Any chance this is related to this issue? http://groups.google.com/group/slurm-devel/browse_thread/thread/62aba28f28ca599e > On another note. While I don't discourage anyone from testing and developing > with the 2.4 branch I would strongly suggest using 2.3 on any production > cluster. In any pre-release version of the code the releases may or may not > be compatible with previous ones and could lead to job loss. It isn't clear > what kind of environment you are running in and I just wanted to give a > warning before it is too late. If you are just testing or developing then you > have chosen correctly though. I'm using it alongside 2.1 for development/testing purposes. No real work is being produced with it, but I'm trying to use real workloads.
