Ticket 6141

Summary: squeue -o %b Does not output delimiter after field
Product: Slurm Reporter: Morgan Rodgers <mrodgers>
Component: User CommandsAssignee: Jacob Jenson <jacob>
Status: RESOLVED DUPLICATE QA Contact:
Severity: 6 - No support contract    
Priority: --- CC: tdockendorf
Version: 18.08.3   
Hardware: Linux   
OS: Linux   
See Also: https://bugs.schedmd.com/show_bug.cgi?id=6120
Site: -Other- Alineos Sites: ---
Atos/Eviden Sites: --- Confidential Site: ---
Coreweave sites: --- Cray Sites: ---
DS9 clusters: --- HPCnow Sites: ---
HPE Sites: --- IBM Sites: ---
NOAA SIte: --- OCF Sites: ---
Recursion Pharma Sites: --- SFW Sites: ---
SNIC sites: --- Linux Distro: ---
Machine Name: CLE Version:
Version Fixed: Target Release: ---
DevPrio: --- Emory-Cloud Sites: ---
Attachments: squeue tres print fix

Description Morgan Rodgers 2018-11-29 13:21:50 MST 
Hi folks,

We make use of squeue's output formatting to create parsable reports for running jobs. We noticed a couple problems with TRES/%b in 18.08.3. 

%b no longer appears in the man pages, which led me to think that it had been removed.

More importantly for some reason passing %b to --format/-o does not output a delimiter when one is specified after the TRES field. For example:

    [vagrant@ood ood]$ squeue -o "%b DELIM %a DELIM %D"
    TRES_PER_NODEACCOUNT DELIM NODES
    N/Aosc001 DELIM 1

Note how the TRES and account fields have been concatenated in both the header and the values.
Comment 1 Trey Dockendorf 2018-11-29 13:48:55 MST 
Created attachment 8467 [details]
squeue tres print fix
Comment 2 Trey Dockendorf 2018-11-29 13:50:54 MST 
Tested the attached patch against 18.08.3 source and appears to fix the issue:

$ squeue -o "%b DELIM %a DELIM %D"
TRES_PER_NODE DELIM ACCOUNT DELIM NODES
N/A DELIM (null) DELIM 1
Comment 3 Jason Booth 2018-12-03 09:00:13 MST 
Hi all,

 We are tracking this issue via 6120 and I will copy over your patch to that issue shortly. Thanks for the contribution and I will go ahead and mark this as a duplicate of 6120.

*** This ticket has been marked as a duplicate of ticket 6120 ***