Community
cancel
Showing results for 
Show  only  | Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

Option to have a single Job Processor for a multi-site installation

Option to have a single Job Processor for a multi-site installation

If you want to use the Job Server feature in a multi-site installation, you are required to have 1 instance of Job Processor running for each site.  It would be nicer if there was an option to manage everything with a single instance of Job Processor.

6 Comments
ihayesjr
Community Manager
Status changed to: Accepted
 
Mark_Wigan
Collaborator

the goal is to run the job processor on many files that are spread accross several replicated servers.

 

the hurdle is that if you have the job processor logged into one server and it attempts to process a file that is currently owned by a different server, the task cannot be completed successfully. "error"...

 

we need to be able to allow for this in the job processor settings, whether it is to simply choose

1.  "skip file that is not owned by your server", or

2. "run jobs on tasks with preference to one server over another". the job processor would be able to batch together a few hundred jobs for example, to complete on the local replicated server, then reboot itself (or log out and log into a different server) to run a few hundred files that are owned by the other server(s).

3. allow the job processor to run on files regardless of whether they are owned by another server, or

4. allow the option to choose: "if files are owned by a different server, then just run (several topions may be available here).

 

 

there may be easier ways to manage this but the job processor is going to be of much more use with some enhancement. (to be read in consideration with the several other requests for job processor improvements currently on the ideas station and discussion forumns).

Tags (2)
ihayesjr
Community Manager
Status changed to: Gathering Support
 
Mark_Wigan
Collaborator

not sure what status change to 'comment requested' means. is there a request for more information or just that we are waiting for others to consider before gaining momentum?

 

so, further to my last post,

 

... potential config or settings option 5. from within vault explorer, when you select files needing an update, when you choose Actions, update view, queue update: give us an additional choice (or at least force the functionality) to send to the job processor on the same server as the file current owner. this would prevent as many errors, and take some of the work out of managing several replicated servers.

 

there should also be a setting to generate the dwf without the folder being owned by the same workgroup... this is yet another cause of failure to generate dwf file... (not an obvious cause initially given the error message is not overly specific).

 

many thanks.

tmoney2007
Collaborator

I think that Vault and Job Processor should just be smart enough to figure this kind of stuff out.  It is very rudimentary.

 

When a task is created, vault should probably check the ownership of that file, and create the job on in that queue, or use one of the other solutions above.

ihayesjr
Community Manager
Status changed to: Future Consideration
 

Can't find what you're looking for? Ask the community or share your knowledge.

Submit Idea  

Autodesk Design & Make Report