Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
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
Support more methods of WDL task disk specification #5001
Support more methods of WDL task disk specification #5001
Changes from 8 commits
3971be6
48990d0
e8d223c
fbe0eef
8f7199a
166bf41
d7719b9
0c131e0
b4714ec
4443728
8da0d7d
9379715
85a4df9
6aa73b1
cc36f71
36fd277
c7bec56
4b4e7f0
6bf2a4e
31b7e27
98bba55
25e0e51
42fedf6
d35d033
9d75e4b
f752535
4ce33d5
e9df2f9
01b8102
2955c4d
a364601
02d873f
b65b315
6f30676
58196ce
66d3e50
ea19cb6
32c65dd
63b4410
a1a8651
29ffd3f
7068810
c090823
14e2ee1
901c4c2
aa58e2f
8b15af6
e04f5c1
ae2f169
eb56ef9
a21fc3a
1a098b4
ceccb07
839e09b
89ca0d4
bf3ca2a
4130ab8
d194edc
f2080a8
f0dbe3f
e6a9082
6fbef8c
68fb254
8d093dd
b184386
67b2554
7f4b452
07d6b31
f3a3a2f
9ab5c9c
0f247a6
067ee8d
a7a1459
c7ac131
806ff9c
acaa894
accf831
a0b65f4
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
There are no files selected for viewing
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
We don't have anything here to prohibit extraneous pieces. We probably should reject anything that follows neither the spec nor Cromwell's convention, because in that case we know we can't do whatever is being asked for.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This is what the spec says we're supposed to require (the mount point needs to exist on the "host system"), but I've read the disks section of the spec twice and that requirement doesn't really make any sense, because we're mounting storage into the container. The spec doesn't say we actually do anything with this path on the host.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
We should also probably switch the default unit to
GB
here, since that is what the Cromwell syntax expects.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think it's better to keep the default unit to
GiB
as that is the WDL spec default https://github.com/openwdl/wdl/blob/e43e042104b728df1f1ad6e6145945d2b32331a6/SPEC.md?plain=1#L5082There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
How sure are you that the spec actually means you're supposed to mount this particular host path through to the container?
It does say that the host path is required to exist. But it also says a lot about mounting "persistent volumes" at these mount points, and making them the required size. It doesn't seem to say anything about mounting those host paths specifically into the container.
What if you ask for a 100 GiB
/tmp
mount, and/tmp
exists on the host, but/tmp
on the host is only 10 GiB and Toil is actually doing all its work on a much larger/scratch/tmp
? Shouldn't you get a 100 GiB/tmp
mount in the container that actually refers to some location in/scratch/tmp
on the host?If the mount point feature was really meant to mount particular host paths across, wouldn't it take both a host-side path and a container-side path like the actual underlying mount functionality uses?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I'm not sure it makes sense to add the ability to make these mounts in Toil as a monkey-patch. There's nothing here that wouldn't make just as much sense in MiniWDL (or more, since MiniWDL actually has a shared filesystem as an assumption), so instead of doing monkey-patches we should PR this machinery to MiniWDL.
Or if we're starting to add multiple monkey-patches to the TaskContainers, maybe we really want to extend them instead?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
It probably is a good idea to PR this machinery to MiniWDL. The main reason why I had to monkeypatch this in the first place is because MiniWDL doesn't actually support the
disks
runtime attribute. Instead of PR-ing the code one-to-one, I think a PR that adds functionality to extend the list of mount points for both docker and singularity is best