Repository navigation
Conversation
Problem: RFC 31 can only test whether an execution target has a
property, not compare the property's value. A job cannot select
targets by a numeric characteristic with its own threshold, such as
nodes rated under 400 W.
Add four operators, lt, le, gt and ge, taking an object that names the
property and the value to compare against:
{ "lt": [ { "property": "power", "value": 400 } ] }
Several objects in one operator are conjunctive. A target without the
property, or whose value cannot be read as a number, does not match.
Assisted-by: Claude:opus-5.5
Problem: the review of RFC 31 asked to drop the reference to RFC 35 and to say how a property value is compared with a number. Drop RFC 35 from Related Standards: nothing in the new text refers to it. A target whose value cannot be read as a number does not match, replacing "cannot be compared with value". Add a word about preserving previous behavior when using tagged properties. Assisted-by: Claude:opus-5.5
adfaure
force-pushed
the
seanergys-rfc31-resource-attribute-comparison
branch
from
October 26, 2026 09:54
5e2ccc9 to
e2229de
Compare
Member
|
I really like this idea. Will have to take some time to read over the proposal, but it certainly seems like it's worth doing for things that are non-consumable like versions or architectures or similar. |
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
Add numeric comparison constraints on property values
Problem: a job cannot select nodes by a numeric characteristic representing a non-consumable fixed property, e.g. :
Workarounds fall short:
bw_3000): the admin must define every threshold in advance.OAR (
-p "memnode > 64000") supports this.Proposal
Fluxion already stores property values; this adds a constraint that reads them:
{ "lt": [ { "property": "thermal_design_power", "value": 400 } ] }Operators
lt,le,gt,ge. A missing or non-numeric value does not match. Composes withand/or/not. An exact value isandofgeandle;eq/necould be added if preferred.The syntax is a placeholder. A shorter form,
{ "thermal_design_power": [ "<400" ] }, would follow the RFC 43 convention; the form above keeps the operator set closed.Open question: property values
The operators read a property's value, but no RFC defines one. Fluxion stores properties as name → string: JGF (RFC 40) carries
"properties": {"thermal_design_power": "350"}, andflux ion-resource set-propertysets them. RFC 40 requires thepropertieskey but leaves its form undefined, and R (RFC 20) has no place for a value (Fluxion writesthermal_design_power=350as a name).We kept this PR to RFC 31. Should the value form be specified, e.g. in RFC 40, and should that happen here or in a follow-up?
Limitations
nodeandstorage_nodeonly, like other constraints.