On Sat, Apr 18, 2020 at 10:56:09AM -0600, Theo de Raadt wrote: > Raul Miller <rauldmil...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > On Sat, Apr 18, 2020 at 12:25 PM Aham Brahmasmi <aham.brahma...@gmx.com> > > wrote: > > > The examples and Theo's reply helped in understanding the nuance. It > > > might seem logical and common sense on further thought, as Janne has > > > pointed out. But at least in my case, it was not immediately apparent. > > > > Yeah, after rethinking it, I had goofed in my reading. > > > > I guess it's nothing that a simple experiment wouldn't have shown up. > > > > That said, it wouldn't have been difficult to also calculate the first > > minute of each new ~ delimited interval and (re-)randomize it at that > > point in time. (The system already calculates the min and max for each > > ~ instance.) > > OK, so one time it chooses 59, and then it re-randomizes as 1, but the job > takes >2 minutes. > > Awesome....
I would honestly say that would be a user error tho. You have the same issue in -stable today with jobs possibly overlapping due to less than careful scheduling. -- Andreas (Kusalananda) Kähäri SciLifeLab, NBIS, ICM Uppsala University, Sweden .
