Re: [HTCondor-users] Target.Opsys vs Opsys

[Ian Cottam <Ian.Cottam@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Thanks for your comments and clarifications, which we agree with.
BW
-Ian

On 15/03/2016, 16:05, "HTCondor-users on behalf of John M Knoeller"
<htcondor-users-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx on behalf of johnkn@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

>The last clause of -better-analyze (the part the sometimes makes
>recommendations) is pretty old code, and was not changed from the 7
>series to the 8 series. (other than some minor formatting changes)
>
>I had never noticed that the last clause would be wrong if you left off
>the TARGET or Arch and Opsys, but
>it makes some sense to me that that would be the case.
>
>The clause above that, which breaks down the requirements into the
>simplest Boolean operations and shows only 'relevent' ones has been
>changed more recently.
>
>As far as I know, the last clause can sometimes lie, but the one above
>that never does - do you agree?
>
>-tj
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: HTCondor-users [mailto:htcondor-users-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On
>Behalf Of Ian Cottam
>Sent: Tuesday, March 15, 2016 7:57 AM
>To: HTCondor-Users Mail List <htcondor-users@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>Subject: [HTCondor-users] Target.Opsys vs Opsys
>
>We recently switched to the 8.2 series after getting some issues with a
>mixed bag of 7 and 8 machines in our Pool. Anyway . . .
>
>A colleague pointed out to me that you get better / more consistent
>information when you do a condor_q -better-analyze if the job
>Requirements look like this Requirements = (Target.OpSys == "LINUX") &&
>(Target.Arch == "X86_64") rather than the usual Requirements = (OpSys ==
>"LINUX") && (Arch == "X86_64")
>
>
>To my surprise he is correct.
>He thought it was a change in the 8 series, but as I see no mention in
>the manual I expect it has always been so.
>
>My colleague phrased it:
>"People who do use the -better-analyze option would not get conflicting
>advice (from the same output!): In one part reporting that there are
>plenty of matches, and yet in another place reporting that there are no
>matches and advising removing the two requirements. I know that it left
>me wondering whether there was some subtle issue with my submit.txt file."
>
>
>Comments?
>-Ian
>--
>Ian Cottam  | Technical Support Manager | School of Computer Science  |
>LF24 Kilburn Building  |  The University of Manchester  |  M13 9PL  |
>
>
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>HTCondor-users mailing list
>To unsubscribe, send a message to htcondor-users-request@xxxxxxxxxxx with
>a
>subject: Unsubscribe
>You can also unsubscribe by visiting
>https://lists.cs.wisc.edu/mailman/listinfo/htcondor-users
>
>The archives can be found at:
>https://lists.cs.wisc.edu/archive/htcondor-users/
>_______________________________________________
>HTCondor-users mailing list
>To unsubscribe, send a message to htcondor-users-request@xxxxxxxxxxx with
>a
>subject: Unsubscribe
>You can also unsubscribe by visiting
>https://lists.cs.wisc.edu/mailman/listinfo/htcondor-users
>
>The archives can be found at:
>https://lists.cs.wisc.edu/archive/htcondor-users/
>