3 Feb 2010 00:29
Re: conf call minutes - Jan. 6th 2010
> I didn't noticed that I agreed to the Job/String duality. The point > about dealing with tens of thousands of jobs as Job objects being > difficult may be true, but I'm not sure I like the idea of handling > them > as String objects instead. A better approach might be to offer some > kind of aggregate object, like those silly opaque iterators from the C > binding. > > I guess we need to look at use cases. The only reason I can see that > you'd want to wait for 10k jobs and actually look at the returned list > of jobs, is if you have a list of jobs you launched, and you're > waiting > for them to finish. Since the job ids are opaque, you can't shortcut > the job ids with math. In order to keep a list of 10k jobs, even as > String objects, you're going to have to take a clever approach. If Good point. From my knowledge, only scripting languages such as Python treat string as scalar data type. I still like the duality approach, but the reasoning is a little bit weak. We need to discuss that again. > that you can find out the names of the jobs. Heck, maybe job name > should be part of the Job object directly. In that kind of situation, > an iterator would be exactly what you want, and it could be smart > enough > not to keep all the Job objects alive at once. Iterators are no concept in DRMAA so far, which is good. Mapping everything to C (in a nice way !) is already painful enough .... Best,(Continue reading)
But really: if needed we can certainly help out, but I guess Dan
would do a much better job at representing DRMAA than we could...
Anyway, just let us know, in case you become desparate
RSS Feed