Am 19.09.2012 um 18:38 schrieb Dave Love: > 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?
Do you think something is missing? For serverside JSV it's just always: CLIENT=qmaster CONTEXT=server CMDNAME=NONE and that is fixed. You mean something like ISSUING_CLIENT should be there? -- Reuti >> 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
