Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

flux_kvs_fence() documentation vs kvs server behavior #1305

Closed
chu11 opened this issue Dec 12, 2017 · 0 comments · Fixed by #1329
Closed

flux_kvs_fence() documentation vs kvs server behavior #1305

chu11 opened this issue Dec 12, 2017 · 0 comments · Fixed by #1329
Assignees

Comments

@chu11
Copy link
Member

chu11 commented Dec 12, 2017

Noticed a mismatch between the manpage documentation and what the kvs server does:

`flux_kvs_fence()` is a "collective" version of `flux_kvs_commit()` that
supports multiple callers.  Each caller uses the same _flags_, _name_,
and _nprocs_ arguments.

The "same flags, name, and nprocs" isn't entirely true. There is no check to determine if nprocs and flags are the same as prior calls. Only the nprocs on the first call actually matters. The flags are ORed together from each fence call. So the flags can be different between calls.

I'm thinking the kvs server should probably check to make sure the same nprocs and flags were specified for each fence with the same name. And unit tests added appropriately.

@chu11 chu11 self-assigned this Feb 8, 2018
chu11 added a commit to chu11/flux-core that referenced this issue Feb 9, 2018
Previously, fences could be updated with new flags.  Instead,
require users to always specify the same nprocs and flags with
each fence request.  Return error if user does not.

Fixes flux-framework#1305
chu11 added a commit to chu11/flux-core that referenced this issue Feb 9, 2018
Previously, fences could be updated with new flags.  Instead,
require users to always specify the same nprocs and flags with
each fence request.  Return error if user does not.

Fixes flux-framework#1305
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

1 participant