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

[David Froble]

Stephen Hoffman wrote:
> On 2017-07-30 01:55:51 +0000, IanD said:
> 
>> I called the VMS batch system stone age because in the context of 
>> scheduling and workflow automation, it is.
> 
> Ayup.   When something as clunky as launchd can do better in some ways 
> than what OpenVMS offers for scheduling, and when there's serious 
> mention of using cron to schedule processes, it's just not a good place.
> 
>> So the answer is to then leave the VMS batch system alone, not bother 
>> with a scheduler and roll over and play dead to other schedulers / 
>> workload systems? /Sarcasm mode ON
> 
> I'm here reminded of one of the more classic joke responses to OpenVMS 
> enhancement requests: http://www.seefigure1.com/seefigure1.html
> 
> Not that I think there's any path forward with any not-invented-here or 
> "always done it this way" approach.   Save toward either app or career 
> retirement, of course.
> 
> VSI has the unenviable task of figuring out and variously guessing at 
> what to work on here, within their comparatively limited budget and 
> staffing.   Outside of whatever might become available from open source 
> porting or maybe from container-related work, and whatever ISVs might 
> offer, scheduling will likely not be part of that, at least for the next 
> several years.

I've got to wonder what percentage of the current base is fine, vs what part has 
this need.  That leads into whether this is a solution looking for a problem to 
solve.

It might be nice to be able to open up a window and see everything that's going 
on, now, and scheduled, in layman's terms.  I won't dispute that.  But "nice" 
and "needed" are not the same thing.

Since VSI has limited resources, and VSI is most likely at this time targeting 
the existing users, then VSI might best concentrate on how best to serve those 
existing users.

I doubt that some spiffy new super duper scheduler is at the top of the users list.