[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Batch systems: Torque, SLURM, other?



Hello Steffen!

Thanks for your reply!

Am Dienstag, den 15.05.2007, 20:05 +0200 schrieb Steffen Moeller:
> Hallo Manuel, a nice domain name you have. 

Thanks! ;)

> [...] I keep nagging the Torque upstream developers about officiall
> supporting Debian or to allow us promoting their work via Debian on a
> yearly basis. You find very nice diff.gzs for Debianisation on the net
> and we have some on our own. All I get in reply are "we are thinking
> about it - many thanks for your offer"-replies. The license can be
> read in a way that one would not even need to ask, but it is at least
> against my principles not to have asked and I IIRC it is also against
> Debian's.

Having a Debian package or not is not really an issue, though I'd like
to see Torque in Debian.

> Hence, I personally think that SLURM should be the way to go, although
> I am not prepared to change for the moment, not having the glimpse of
> an idea how well it works.

Having read about SLURM all day and comparing it to Torque, I share your
opinion here. SLURM's documentation is excellent which is definitely a
plus. Still have to see how it performs.

> Good luck!

Thanks!

Manuel

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Dies ist ein digital signierter Nachrichtenteil


Reply to: