Hi,
If everyone an early adopter, is anyone an early adopter? While we
ponder that, I've got something to say/ask about emi-cream and
emi-torque. Maybe an early-adopter could enlighten me?
The plan was to fix a new new emi-cream onto our existing (separate)
glite_TORQUE_server cluster. But I discovered that emi-torque (server
and utils) is built to use MUNGE to safety transmit the login details.
This is a new thing.
Unfortunately, due to MUNGE, the emi-cream can't qsub from a system
using emi-torque-utils to a batch cluster headnode that uses
glite_TORQUE_server (job array syntax is also new). This would mean
that, by design, emi-cream cannot work with a standalone
glite_TORQUE_server cluster -- the whole lot has to be updated at once.
This could deserve a GGUS ticket, but I'm not sure of the facts -- is it
possible to run emi-cream/emi-torque-utils with an existing
glite_TORQUE_server? Does any early adopter know of any lawful
impediment to this GGUS ticket? Should it be possible to qsub from a
system using emi-torque-utils to a batch cluster headnode that uses
glite_TORQUE_server?
Cheers, Steve
|