Conversation
dca34c4 to
bf614d0
Compare
Problem: we cannot define a shape on the command line to map into a job specification resources section. Solution: first add a command line jobspec that defines this shape. Signed-off-by: vsoch <vsoch@users.noreply.github.com>
bf614d0 to
2bdf6ed
Compare
|
Slightly concerned about muddying the terminology here since we already have a jobspec and it contains a different set of information. Maybe we could call this a "short form resource request" or maybe a "job shape specification"? Also, the fact that it fits conveniently on the command line could just be one item in the goals section rather than in the title. One thing I thought turned out well in some of our other RFCs is to have a Test Vectors section at the end that specifies a table of inputs and outputs. If this is a strict translation from "new thing" to the jobspec v1 Reources section, then maybe that would be applicable here? Finally just wanted again to mention OAR as I think their |
|
Okay I’ll ping - @trws - he suggested the command line job spec (which makes sense to be different I think) and we talked about the design of the shape in slack today. And I did see oar - very subjectively I don’t think it’s very nice looking / pretty. We could also have count just be an attribute so it would have that format and not put it in the brackets. |
|
OK! Those were just my off the cuff first impressions, so take them with appropriate grains of salt etc |
|
yeah totally! Here is count as an attribute: If I had to guess, the rationale for just using the number is that it's common enough that we shouldn't have to write out |
Problem: we cannot define a shape on the command line to map into a job specification resources section. Solution: first add a command line jobspec that defines this shape.
I've never written one of these before - let me know what I should expand / contract or fix!