Skip to content

TES backend bugfix #426

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Merged
merged 4 commits into from
Feb 26, 2018
Merged

TES backend bugfix #426

merged 4 commits into from
Feb 26, 2018

Conversation

adamstruck
Copy link
Contributor

I messed up a few things in the last few commits of my previous PR.

@adamstruck
Copy link
Contributor Author

I also seem to be having issues with InitialWorkDirRequirement. The input file doesn't seem to be mapped into the working directory. Not sure what has changed since I opened #409 but now instead of the input being passed to Funnel twice it is passed once, but is mounted incorrectly.

So I am not sure if this is something I messed up or due to another change.

@milos-ljubinkovic
Copy link
Contributor

Yeah, you removed one of the 2 getRequirements(bindings) calls. InitialWorkDirRequirement is only properly created/populated after the bindings.preprocess method is called so you need to put the second one back.

@adamstruck
Copy link
Contributor Author

adamstruck commented Feb 21, 2018

That did not fix the problem. This InitialWorkDirRequirement issue appears to be present prior to my previous PR.

@adamstruck
Copy link
Contributor Author

I was able to fix this issue in 9da61f5. Can you confirm that this fix looks correct?

@milos-ljubinkovic
Copy link
Contributor

Looks ok just add a null check for the resources, some tests are failing. Also test to see if this wf properly stages the secondary file on s3

@adamstruck
Copy link
Contributor Author

The workflow you referenced does work and stages the secondary file output on s3.

The TES backend currently uploads all files in its working directory. I think we may want to be more specific about defining outputs in the TES message in the future, but the current approach seems to be working for now.

@milos-ljubinkovic milos-ljubinkovic merged commit 7f96c65 into rabix:develop Feb 26, 2018
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants