-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 50
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
Comments
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
Great observation, sorry about the inconsistency. I'm all for fixing it! |
Cool! I can submit a PR to core along with my emulator fix PR to sched. |
Thanks @SteVwonder! |
I agree! We should try to avoid the term lwj at this point? |
Sure, but:
Maybe we be sure to drop the term in the wreck replacement? 😄 |
SteVwonder
added a commit
to SteVwonder/flux-core
that referenced
this issue
Apr 1, 2018
SteVwonder
added a commit
to SteVwonder/flux-core
that referenced
this issue
Apr 1, 2018
SteVwonder
added a commit
to SteVwonder/flux-core
that referenced
this issue
Apr 1, 2018
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
In the
wreck.state.*
andjsc.state.*
events , the job ID has the keylwj
. In thesched.cancel
,job.create
,job.submit
, andjob.submit-nocreate
RPCs, the request/response usejobid
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 containingjobid
and then emits an event with thelwj
key.For consistency, I recommend changing the events to use
jobid
for the key rather thanlwj
. Thoughts?The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: