[torquedev] Reorganizing TORQUE Source Code

[Joshua Bernstein]

Josh Butikofer wrote:
> TORQUE Developers:
> 
> Over the past few months I've been looking through the TORQUE source 
> code and trying to find ways to improve its organization. I've found 
> that there are several pieces of code that are data structures and 
> utility functions used in both pbs_server and pbs_mom that are NOT part 
> of the shared library package. This is fine, except for the fact that in 
> some cases the functions/data structures are defined twice--once in 
> pbs_mom code and once in pbs_server code. Oftentimes it is a direct copy 
> and paste. In my mind this is not only silly, but potentially dangerous, 
> as keeping these two copies in sync is a maintenance burden.
> 
> I've also found that I want to add a generic function to TORQUE, but am 
> forced to add it to some unrelated module like "job_func.c"...even 
> though it has NOTHING to do with jobs, per se.
> 
> So I have a proposal.
> 
> We would like to create a new "utility" module in TORQUE. This C module 
> would be statically linked into both the pbs_server and pbs_mom at 
> compile time. It would NOT be part of the shared library, but it would 
> still be found in its own "Libutil" directory. We would move any 
> functions defined/used by both pbs_server and pbs_mom into this module, 
> as well as any other functions that are generic enough that it would 
> warrant their placement there.
> 
> We already have a patch to do this work and are eager to check it in. I 
> just wanted to double check if there are any objections or if anyone has 
> any reservations. We plan on introducing this reorganized code into the 
> next version of TORQUE 2.3.x. (No code logic is actually changing, so 
> the functionality should remain exactly the same.)
> 
> Let me know what you think.

Seems to make sense to me. At the very least it should make it easier to add new 
functionality to TORQUE in the future.

-Joshua Bernstein
Software Engineer
Penguin Computing