[Info-vax] Workload manager for VMS, Should it come with one? (or at least a Scheduler?)

[Arne Vajhøj]

On 7/29/2017 5:26 PM, Kerry Main wrote:
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Info-vax [mailto:info-vax-bounces at rbnsn.com] On Behalf Of IanD
>> via Info-vax
>> In the stone age we started with the VMS batch subsystem
> 
> Its not a stone age concept. Batch files are an integral component of
> any modern OS offering.

"in the stone age" = many years ago aka place in timeline
"stone age concept" = old fashioned concept aka obsolete

>> Then evolved to scheduler tools, such as CA scheduler and DEC
> scheduler
>>
> 
> No - schedulers are tools that automate the "scheduling" of batch jobs.
> 
> Two different components.

True. But one build on the other.

>> Then in VMS land we went backwards, DEC scheduler stopped running
>> on newer versions of VMS probably some 10 years ago
>>
> 
> DEC Scheduler was sold to CA, but is still an active (and maintained)
> product offering:
> http://bit.ly/2tSCdtK
> 
>> Having to roll your own scheduler on VMS one is painful and often
>> requires lots of DCL wrapper code just to get simplistic management
>> happening. Relying upon an external scheduler like JAMS on another
>> platform has issues too if one wants to go off the platform and onto
>> another reservation!
> 
> Which is why if one needs a commercial product above and beyond what a
> native platform offers, one goes out and buys one.

>> The batch job entries are individualistic in nature, they are not associated
>> with other entries and/or cannot be rolled up into separate classes etc
>> making their management even more painful.
>>
>> Should an OS like VMS come with a workload management system or at
>> least a scheduler system that supports inter job dependencies and other
>> such goodies?
> 
> You are asking if VSI should develop a native offering that would
> replace a commercial product offering. ISV's really , really hate this.

Some very successful companies has done it anyway.

But in the current situation it makes sense for VSI to focus on core
stuff and leave the addon's to the ISV's.

>> Is the VMS vision to evolve to a system that will support workload
>> management naively under some type of framework or are we distend
>> to forever fight the job enemy with just the batch queue bow and
>> arrow?
> 
> Most Customers these days do not want a platform specific job scheduler.
> 
> They want an enterprise job scheduler that supports multiple platforms.

Yes.

> What would be helpful is if VSI were to continue to contact 3rd party
> products to ensure they continue their support for OpenVMS.

Indeed.

And I don't think VSI is desperately looking for new tasks to take on.

:-)

Arne