On Thu, 18 Nov 2004, Greg Hewgill wrote:
On Thu, 18 Nov 2004 09:49:38 -0800, Rajic, Hrabri <hrabri.rajic@intel.com> wrote:
Andreas Haas, the SGE lead was looking for an active person to collaborate on the "C Bindings DRMAA 1.0 Specification" document, so your entry is very timely. Would you like to engage in such a process?
Sure, I'd be happy to help. I also plan to implement the Java language bindings.
Welcome Greg! looking forward to work with you on finalizing C DRMAA spec. DRMAA WG got this on the roadmap until GGF13. This means we need to resolve remaining C binding issues ... ASAP. Please use http://forge.gridforum.org/projects/drmaa-wg http://forge.gridforum.org/projects/drmaa-wg/tracker/ to get an overview on these issues ("Doc Change Request"). Through "Category" you can easily filter out C binding issues. Current top issue is #1141. Actually this is merely a problem with formulating, but it's important because real interoperability won't be achieved without that capability. How about "The DRMAA library shall be delivered in a way allowing for run time linking." would this be specific and clear enough? Problem is that concepts common in Unix world such as shared/dynamic linking have no meaning in Windows world.
Could you tell us what is the DRM system in question? BTW, few people have asked for a PBS DRMAA implementation in the past.
This is for the United Devices Grid MP product.
Good!
I also think that a reference stub implementation, that has no dependency on any actual grid system and just runs everything locally, would be useful for prototyping.
Sureley, why not? Cheers, Andreas