On Thu, 7 Apr 2005, Joseph L. Kaiser wrote:

> Hi,
>
> So is this work that is on-going or has it fallen by the wayside?  Is

I think we cannot spend time on improving the standard job managers.
We are moving away from Globus job submission anyway: gLite introduces
a new CE that uses Condor-C (sic) for job submission and monitoring,
and that is what we want to be using by the summer.

> the lcgcondor still a cut above the current condor jobmanager?  We want
> to minimize the need for access to a shared filesystem as much as
> possible so if lcgcondor is still a good way to go, we will include this
> in our upgrade to LCG-2_4_0 next week.

AFAIK even the normal Condor job manager does not need a shared file system.

Both versions are used in LCG: Gergely Debreczeni uses the standard version
in Budapest, Leslie Groer uses the LCG version in Toronto; I suppose that
they can provide you with tips and caveats.

> On Thu, 2005-04-07 at 16:04, Maarten Litmaath, CERN wrote:
> > On Thu, 7 Apr 2005, Joseph L. Kaiser wrote:
> >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > What is the difference between the lcgcondor and the condor job managers
> > > as supplied by LCG?  What are the advantages/disadvantages of running
> > > one versus the other?
> >
> > The LCG version would be more robust.  The LCG job manager for PBS was
> > developed mainly to avoid the need for shared home directories, but at
> > the same time various robustness improvements were made, that we intended
> > to feed back into the standard job managers, but that never happened.
> > Condor does not need shared home directories, but its LCG job manager
> > would still have profited from the other improvements.
>