Re: [Condor-users] Weird flurry of condor_shadow problem emails this morning

[Jaime Frey <jfrey@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Mar 10, 2008, at 9:58 AM, Ian Chesal wrote:

> My inbox was full of messages from my condor_schedd on the other  
> side of
> the world telling me about problems with condor_shadow. The emails all
> looked like this:	
>
> 	Subject: [Condor] Condor job 10725.239 put on hold
> 	
> 	This is an automated email from the Condor system
> 	on machine "pg-schedd1.altera.com".  Do not reply.
>
> 	Condor job 10725.239 has been put on hold.
> 	No condor_shadow installed that supports vanilla jobs
> 	on resources older than V6.3.3
> 	Please correct this problem and release the job with
> 	"condor_release"
>
> My first thought was maybe the NFS file system where we host condor  
> went
> down. Nope. I got smart to this years ago and now, on my central
> servers, I keep Condor on local disk. So there's a copy of  
> condor_shadow
> in /opt/condor/sbin. And it says it's 6.8.6 I386-LINUX_RHEL3 just like
> it should.
>
> Nothing has been changed in /opt/condor. Time stamps are fine.
>
> Very mysterious. The emails happened around 7:00 am. I didn't see them
> until 10:00 am. Looking at the queue on the scheduler now everything  
> is
> either I or R, so it all got released automatically.
>
> Can anyone offer some insight into what might have occurred here?  
> We've
> *never* run anything older that 6.7.x at Altera. My guess is that this
> message might get sent if a condor_shadow binary can't be found -- is
> that possible? Someone /opt/condor/sbin/condor_shadow couldn't be seen
> by the condor_schedd process running the machine perhaps?


A missing condor_shadow binary shouldn't cause this error. What will  
cause it is a machine ad that's missing its CondorVersion attribute  
and a missing condor_shadow.std binary.

Thanks and regards,
Jaime Frey
UW-Madison Condor Team