On Thu, Jul 05, 2012 at 11:44:06AM +0200, Gandalf Corvotempesta wrote:
>
> So, should I set schedule time for this job one minute less than
> others ?
>
This could help, or simply define a completely separate infrastructure
for this job (Device, Storage and Pool(s)).
Cheers, Uwe
Am 05.07.2012 11:44, schrieb Gandalf Corvotempesta:
> Il giorno gio, 05/07/2012 alle 11.32 +0200, Mario Moder ha scritto:
>> If one job must finish before another starts, you should use lower
>> priorities (higher numbers) for the "later" jobs as you already tried.
>>
>> If the jobs should only _st
Il giorno gio, 05/07/2012 alle 11.32 +0200, Mario Moder ha scritto:
> If one job must finish before another starts, you should use lower
> priorities (higher numbers) for the "later" jobs as you already tried.
>
> If the jobs should only _start_ in a specific order, no matter when they
> finish
Am 05.07.2012 10:37, schrieb Gandalf Corvotempesta:
> hi,
> I have a bounch of job with same priority.
> Is possibile to set a running order within the same priority?
> I've tryied to increase the priority for specific job but in
> this way, all other jobs must wait for it to finish.
That depends
hi,
I have a bounch of job with same priority.
Is possibile to set a running order within the same priority?
I've tryied to increase the priority for specific job but in
this way, all other jobs must wait for it to finish.
We have also set Maximum Concurrent Jobs = 8 but this will
works only for j
