Bug #24057
jobsub_q --better-analyze often asks wrong schedd for job info
0%
Description
See INC000001092616.
The jobsub_q command, for example:
jobsub_q -G mu2e --better-analyze --jobid 2898203.0@jobsub03.fnal.gov
Is trying to ask schedd jobsub03.fnal.gov to analyze why job 2898203.0 has not started.
There is intermediate code between the above jobsub_q command and the resulting condor_q command that finds the least busy schedd (there are currently 3) and directs the query to that one. In the above example I found this in the log:
condor_q -allusers -nobatch -name jobsub02.fnal.gov -better-analyze -constraint 'True && True && regexp("jobsub03.fnal.gov#2898203\.0#.*",GlobalJobId) && True'.
-name jobsub02.fnal.gov should be -name jobsub03.fnal.gov. This got through CI as we only have one schedd on our test setup.
Associated revisions
History
#1 Updated by Dennis Box 11 months ago
- Assignee changed from Dennis Box to Shreyas Bhat
- Status changed from New to Feedback
see branch 24057 for review. You may diff against bd5ac0c58bedbf02d31d4ac54b00f7acde79b58c to see relevant changes
#2 Updated by Shreyas Bhat 11 months ago
So this looks good, but I'm wondering if lines 267-279 can be more cleanly and clearly accomplished with regex matching, since we're trying to extract the schedd there. Perhaps something like:
if a_filter:
jobid_cnst_regex = re.compile('JobsubJobId==\"\d+(?:\.\d+)?@(.+)\"')
match = jobid_cnst_regex.search(a_filter)
if match is not None and match.groups():
s_list = list(match.groups(1))
What are your thoughts on that?
#3 Updated by Shreyas Bhat 11 months ago
- Assignee changed from Shreyas Bhat to Dennis Box
- Status changed from Feedback to Under Discussion
#4 Updated by Dennis Box 11 months ago
- Status changed from Under Discussion to Resolved
I like the review suggestion. Merged a slightly modified 24057 to master.
test for issue #24057