-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 144
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
Lifetime parameters #417
Comments
Not sure if you have seen but #398 is an attempt to have an error for ignored parameters. Not much time currently to work on this unfortunately ... |
Ah, okay, #386 is the same as what I mentioned in my second paragraph above. |
It is true that lifetime parameters are important to dask-jobqueue. They could be added for this reason. But maybe we should define some policy, either:
If there are some thoughts here from others... |
First a status of declared worker kwargs:
Then, a clarification:
We do not use Nanny or Worker class, and won't do it. With SpecCluster and the use of Job, it is not possible to do that easily. So we can forget this solution. So that leaves us with:
|
My opinion here is to stay with the current situation. Maybe we have already too many optional kwargs for Workers, but I don't want to remove one of them, as they are really important. The only other occurrences of extra kwargs in the docs are the I can propose a rule to decide whether to add a Worker If a
Others proposed here or in the doc do not match the rule above. |
When first trying to use dask_jobqueue, I was used to using
LocalCluster
from distributed where**kwargs
is really**worker_kwargs
and was confused why some options were making it through to the worker but others were not likelifetime
. Stepping through the code, I saw that**kwargs
forJobCluster
were propagated to theoptions
key of theworker
argument toSpecCluster
and then on to the**kwargs
ofdask_jobqueue.core.Job
where it was ignored. I wonder iflifetime
,lifetime-stagger
, andlifetime-restart
should be handled bydask_jobqueue.core.Job
like other command_args are?Also, I wonder if there should be a warning for any unhandled
**kwargs
that make it todask_jobqueue.core.Job
, since the user (like me) is probably confused if they are sending arguments that are making it that far down (I don't think arguments can make it that far in**kwargs
unless they were not used higher up?). The thing that it took me a while to realize was that thedask_jobqueue.core.Job
subclasses kind of are the dask Worker as far as JobCluster is concerned. Renamingextra
todask_worker_additional_args
as suggested in #323 would help some with this confusion.The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: