Lachlan, I am sure it has been mentioned on this thread, but look at Singularity http://singularity.lbl.gov/
From: Lachlan Musicman [mailto:data...@gmail.com] Sent: 16 November 2016 01:45 To: slurm-dev <slurm-dev@schedmd.com> Subject: [slurm-dev] Re: Using slurm to control container images? Yes, rkt was probably my preferred option. The researchers I work with aren't necessarily up to date with what's best practice wrt to this area, so docker is what they know best by virtue of branding/promotion. I don't mind which is used in a solution, if any. But yes, rkt would be my preference. Cheers L. ------ The most dangerous phrase in the language is, "We've always done it this way." - Grace Hopper On 16 November 2016 at 12:29, Jean Chassoul <chass...@gmail.com<mailto:chass...@gmail.com>> wrote: Hi, Just wondering, have you consider rkt? I wonder if you run pip inside virtualenv's if that is the case the switch to a container with rkt seems "normal" instead of a more intrusive one all mighty process to rule everything that docker had the last time I check, its probably better now. Saludos. Jean On Tue, Nov 15, 2016 at 8:21 PM, Lachlan Musicman <data...@gmail.com<mailto:data...@gmail.com>> wrote: Hola, We were looking for the ability to make jobs perfectly reproducible - while the system is set up with environment modules with the increasing number of package management tools - pip/conda; npm; CRAN/Bioconductor - and people building increasingly more complex software stacks, our users have started asking about containerization and slurm. I have found a discussion on this list from about a year ago https://groups.google.com/d/msg/slurm-devel/oPmz5em5tAA/BYlDDfRDzTgJ which mentioned a tool that's not been updated since and one called Shifter by NERSC, which is Cray specific?. Has anyone tried Shifter out and has there been any movement on this? I presume the licensing issues remain. Cheers L. ------ The most dangerous phrase in the language is, "We've always done it this way." - Grace Hopper Any views or opinions presented in this email are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of the company. Employees of XMA Ltd are expressly required not to make defamatory statements and not to infringe or authorise any infringement of copyright or any other legal right by email communications. Any such communication is contrary to company policy and outside the scope of the employment of the individual concerned. The company will not accept any liability in respect of such communication, and the employee responsible will be personally liable for any damages or other liability arising. XMA Limited is registered in England and Wales (registered no. 2051703). Registered Office: Wilford Industrial Estate, Ruddington Lane, Wilford, Nottingham, NG11 7EP
