We invite you to shape the future of IBM, including product roadmaps, by submitting ideas that matter to you the most. Here's how it works:
Post your ideas
Post ideas and requests to enhance a product or service. Take a look at ideas others have posted and upvote them if they matter to you,
Post an idea
Upvote ideas that matter most to you
Get feedback from the IBM team to refine your idea
Help IBM prioritize your ideas and requests
The IBM team may need your help to refine the ideas so they may ask for more information or feedback. The product management team will then decide if they can begin working on your idea. If they can start during the next development cycle, they will put the idea on the priority list. Each team at IBM works on a different schedule, where some ideas can be implemented right away, others may be placed on a different schedule.
Receive notification on the decision
Some ideas can be implemented at IBM, while others may not fit within the development plans for the product. In either case, the team will let you know as soon as possible. In some cases, we may be able to find alternatives for ideas which cannot be implemented in a reasonable time.
We think hosts not included in the queue should not be listed.
But I have learned the following:
Based on current LSF design, "Load threshold reached" is marked as candidate host pending reason. But when these 3 hosts are unavailable, their pending reason changes to "Load information unavailable" that will be marked as non-candidate pending reason. LSF consider a pending reason as candidate or non-candidate based on pending reason content, instead of host name. In the final analysis, customer hopes to filter all pending reasons (no matter candidate or non-candidate) based on host name, instead of pending reason category. It will impact not only displaying, but also scheduling performance. Originally we also thought it was a defect. But after developer's further investigation and discussion with offering manager (original product manager), filtering host name for a queue for ALL pending reasons is a new requirement. We cannot fix it as a bug because it will change LSF design and default behavior. Our development need to consider globle customers.
We understand that LSF consider a pending reason as candidate or non-candidate based on pending reason content, instead of host name.
But from the user's point of view, They don't need to see these hosts if host is not in specified host group.
So we hopes to filter all pending reasons (no matter candidate or non-candidate) based on host name, instead of pending reason category. Admin just want to see only hosts in related queue. It seems reasonable.
Do not place IBM confidential, company confidential, or personal information into any field.