On Apr 27, Karl Czajkowski loaded a tape reading: ...
<jsdl:Resources> <jsdl:TotalCPUs>jsdl:rangeValue</jsdl:TotalCPUs> ? ... other totals for RAM, VM, etc. ... <jsdl:Resource> <jsdl:Count>jsdl:rangeValue</jsdl:Count> ? <jsdl:CPUs>jsdl:rangeValue</jsdl:CPUs> ? ... other per-resource constraints ... </jsdl:Resource> * <jsdl:Resources /> * </jsdl:Resources> *
I have changed the cardinality as I think it should be if we want the general case: 0-N Resources clauses since a job may have none? 0-N Resource clauses per Resources because it may have only "global" constraints 0-N nested Resources if you want the hierarchical model. in this case, we need to define whether "global" attributes summarize all Resource + Resources children or ONLY Resource children. I advocate the first total summation of all children. to address Andreas's problem, I think we should add an attribute to the Resources element: <jsdl:Resources resourceModel="spaceshare"> ... we need to define a few values and also assert a default model to assume if it is not present. I suggest spaceshare as the default because I am biased towards batch jobs. :-) - spaceshare: the resources content describes the virtual "portion" of resource that the job gets to use, which MAY be a small part of a larger physical resource complex - physical: the resources content describes a real physical resource complex (for Andreas's provisioning use case) - virtual: should we presume a virtual machine version of the physical scenario? this seems to be a new popular datacenter trick to get "mainframe" like behavior from commodity hardware... - other: some other extended content SHOULD identify the model interpretation to apply. karl -- Karl Czajkowski karlcz@univa.com