Closed mesmith75 closed 2 months ago
To reply with an error to killing a job in a terminal (i.e. completed, failed, killed) state seems the correct behaviour to me.
The job 2317
was in the running state. Some subjobs were completed, some failed and some were running. I would assume that doing kill()
on the master job would kill the remaining running subjobs without complaint.
Yes, I agree that behaviour is not ideal. In my mind, what should be changed is that the request to kill a completed/failed job should just result in "no operation" and the job just stay as completed/failed.
This needs fixing: