Project

General

Profile

Feature #11492

Support XSEDE ProjectId as a credential in GlideinWMS

Added by Parag Mhashilkar over 4 years ago. Updated over 4 years ago.

Status:
Closed
Priority:
Normal
Assignee:
Parag Mhashilkar
Category:
-
Target version:
Start date:
01/25/2016
Due date:
% Done:

0%

Estimated time:
Stakeholders:

OSG

Duration:

Description

Assigning it to v3.2.12 for now. Based on the changes will readjust the target version.

On Jan 25, 2016, at 12:22 PM, Fajardo Hernandez, Edgar wrote:

Dear GlideinWMs Devs,

Brian and myself have been working these last weeks on some code modifications for allowing the glide ins to use ProjectID. The ProjectID is something used inside XSEDE to track allocations. What this pull contains is the support for passing it all the way from the Frontend to the pilots in the factory. So gatekeepers (gram and htcondor-ce) can use it.

It can be done in two ways:

1.In the frontend configuration the project_id can be added to an existing credential like this:

  <credentials>
        <credential absfname="/tmp/vo_proxy" project_id="TG-123456" security_class="frontend" trust_domain="grid" type="grid_proxy"/>
  </credentials>

2.Or it can be added to an individual submit file for a job like:

+Project_Name="TG-123456"

This has already been tested within the LIGO fronted, the ITB factory and the Stampede gram

I created two pull requests:

One for the master:

https://github.com/holzman/glideinWMS/pull/5

And one for 3_2:

https://github.com/holzman/glideinWMS/pull/6

Lego, OSG Frontend and several other FE and factories have already use for this use case. So If possible let me know how can I help to shepherd this into the main code as fast as possible.

Thanks

-E

History

#1 Updated by Parag Mhashilkar over 4 years ago

Asked Edgar to reissue the pull request with changes made on top of branch_v3_2 only. Current branch_v3_2 pull request has commits made to master.

#2 Updated by Parag Mhashilkar over 4 years ago

#3 Updated by Parag Mhashilkar over 4 years ago

Sent feedback separately. Waiting to hear back.

Summary of feedback
  • Atleast from my code review and debug statements from log, I noticed bugs introduced in couple of places when comparing strings
  • Incompatibility with python 2.4. But this may be a non-issue.
  • Use of expensive deepcopy. Can this be avoided?

#4 Updated by Parag Mhashilkar over 4 years ago

  • Status changed from New to Resolved

Merged to release branches

#5 Updated by Parag Mhashilkar over 4 years ago

  • Status changed from Resolved to Closed


Also available in: Atom PDF