William Hay <[email protected]> writes: >>> As far as I remember, you can distinguish qlogin and command-less qrsh >>> with JSV if necessary. >> >> For the client side JSV yes, as the name of the command will be >> output for CLIENT. But not for the ones started by the qmaster >> (i.e. server side JSV) as the CMDNAME will be NONE in both cases and >> CONTEXT is "server"/CLIENT is "qmaster". You can't even decide >> between `qrsh` with command and `qsub` AFAICS.
It sounds as if a bug report is called for. Could someone who knows what seems to be missing there put it in the tracker? > We currently distinguish between qrsh/qlogin and batch jobs in the > server side JSV by the presence of QRSH_PORT in the requested > environment. I believe the presence of this environment variable is > an undocumented feature and IIRC at least one of the forks was > proposing to get rid of it. Also if you are worried about abuse > someone could probably set QRSH_PORT by hand when submitting a qsub > command Isn't the port info crucial to making the comms work? I assume it would be straightforward at least to have the client stuff QRLOGIN in the environment if it's not there at that stage, but that doesn't sound like the right thing, especially in view of the strictures about environment size. Why do people need to make the interactive/batch distinction? I wonder what really needs testing, especially as there's also potential DRMAA. -- Community Grid Engine: http://arc.liv.ac.uk/SGE/ _______________________________________________ users mailing list [email protected] https://gridengine.org/mailman/listinfo/users
