Re: [HTCondor-users] thoughts on HTCondor python bindings submit improvements

[John M Knoeller <johnkn@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

We *could* multiply the supplied queue count with the one in the submit file, but that isn't possible for the item data,
so I think override would be the most consistent, If it's on you to supply the iterator, then you either get it from the Submit instance
or ignore the one in the Submit instance and supply a different one.

sub = htcondor.Submit("""
    executable = /bin/echo
    queue 3 args from filename
""")

# submit using the itemdata from the queue line
with schedd.transaction() as txn : sub.queue(txn, sub.qcount, sub.itemdata())

# submit using my own itemdata
itemdata = [{'args':'foo'}, {'args':'bar'}]
with schedd.transaction() as txn : sub.queue(txn, 1, iter(itemdata))

# this would be an error because the queue statement specified a different queue count
# and a partial override could lead to an invalid submit.
with schedd.transaction() as txn: sub.queue(txn, 4)

-----Original Message-----
From: HTCondor-users [mailto:htcondor-users-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Dimitri Maziuk
Sent: Tuesday, April 24, 2018 5:40 PM
To: htcondor-users@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [HTCondor-users] thoughts on HTCondor python bindings submit improvements

On 04/24/2018 05:34 PM, John M Knoeller wrote:
> If you prefer to specify the itemdata as a native python iterator, that would work in this scheme. Just leave the queue line  out of the submit file and provide the iterator as a python list

The obvious question then is what happens when I supply both the queue
line and the iterable. Cartesian product?

-- 
Dimitri Maziuk
Programmer/sysadmin
BioMagResBank, UW-Madison -- http://www.bmrb.wisc.edu