Skip to content

GitLab

  • Projects
  • Groups
  • Snippets
  • Help
    • Loading...
  • Help
    • Help
    • Support
    • Community forum
    • Submit feedback
  • Sign in
L
lalsuite
  • Project overview
    • Project overview
    • Details
    • Activity
    • Releases
  • Repository
    • Repository
    • Files
    • Commits
    • Branches
    • Tags
    • Contributors
    • Graph
    • Compare
    • Locked Files
  • Issues 108
    • Issues 108
    • List
    • Boards
    • Labels
    • Service Desk
    • Milestones
    • Iterations
  • Merge Requests 28
    • Merge Requests 28
  • Requirements
    • Requirements
    • List
  • CI / CD
    • CI / CD
    • Pipelines
    • Jobs
    • Schedules
    • Test Cases
  • Operations
    • Operations
    • Incidents
    • Environments
  • Packages & Registries
    • Packages & Registries
    • Container Registry
  • Analytics
    • Analytics
    • CI / CD
    • Code Review
    • Insights
    • Issue
    • Repository
    • Value Stream
  • Wiki
    • Wiki
  • Members
    • Members
  • Activity
  • Graph
  • Create a new issue
  • Jobs
  • Commits
  • Issue Boards
Collapse sidebar
  • lscsoft
  • lalsuite
  • Merge Requests
  • !1435

Merged
Opened Sep 08, 2020 by John Douglas Veitch@john-veitchDeveloper1 of 4 tasks completed1/4 tasks

lalinference_pipe: Do not ENFORCE the use of a queue if it is specified in the .sub file

  • Overview 0
  • Commits 1
  • Pipelines 1
  • Changes 1

Description

@stuart.anderson identified that the lalinference pipeline restricts jobs to run in the priority_pe queue if it is specified in the config file. This change means that it will run on the specified queue in addition to the general pool. The original motivation was so that jobs in the priority_pe queue were not evicted, but this is no longer necessary.

API Changes and Justification

Backwards Compatible Changes

  • This change introduces no API changes
  • This change adds new API calls

Backwards Incompatible Changes

  • This change modifies an existing API
  • This change removes an existing API

If any of the Backwards Incompatible check boxes are ticked please provide a justification why this change is necessary and why it needs to be done in a backwards incompatible way.

Review Status

Please provide details on any reviews related to this change and and the associated reviewers.

Assignee
Assign to
Reviewer
Request review from
None
Milestone
None
Assign milestone
Time tracking
Reference: lscsoft/lalsuite!1435
Source branch: lalinf_pipe_no_restrict_queue