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

lwj vs jobid as job ID key in various JSON payloads #1408

Closed
SteVwonder opened this issue Apr 1, 2018 · 5 comments · Fixed by #1409
Closed

lwj vs jobid as job ID key in various JSON payloads #1408

SteVwonder opened this issue Apr 1, 2018 · 5 comments · Fixed by #1409

Comments

@SteVwonder
Copy link
Member

In the wreck.state.* and jsc.state.* events , the job ID has the key lwj. In the sched.cancel, job.create, job.submit, and job.submit-nocreate RPCs, the request/response use jobid as the key for the job ID.

I found this inconsistency confusing while working on flux-framework/flux-sched#303. job.submit-nocreate consumes a request containing jobid and then emits an event with the lwj key.

For consistency, I recommend changing the events to use jobid for the key rather than lwj. Thoughts?

@SteVwonder SteVwonder changed the title lwj vs jobid as job ID key in msg JSON lwj vs jobid as job ID key in various JSON payloads Apr 1, 2018
@grondo
Copy link
Contributor

grondo commented Apr 1, 2018

Great observation, sorry about the inconsistency. I'm all for fixing it!

@SteVwonder
Copy link
Member Author

Cool! I can submit a PR to core along with my emulator fix PR to sched.

@grondo
Copy link
Contributor

grondo commented Apr 1, 2018

Thanks @SteVwonder!

@dongahn
Copy link
Member

dongahn commented Apr 1, 2018

I agree! We should try to avoid the term lwj at this point?

@grondo
Copy link
Contributor

grondo commented Apr 1, 2018

We should try to avoid the term lwj at this point?

Sure, but:

grondo@moron:~/git/flux-core$ git grep lwj | wc -l
222

Maybe we be sure to drop the term in the wreck replacement? 😄

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.

3 participants