This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Computing: Software High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing articles High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by WikiProject Software (assessed as Mid-importance).

"Benefits of a Job Scheduler" is referring to something I believe is called a "resource scheduler" - which is where you schedule workers, meeting rooms, etc. It has nothing to do with computers. Do a google on "resource scheduler" for examples. I'm pretty sure this doesn't belong in this article. JPalonus 19:29, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think we need to provide first a definition of Job Scheduler and the Historic section 81.208.106.64 21:19, 3 January 2007 (UTC)array[reply]

I have a definition and some history of job scheduling in this draft: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Design%26write/Vinzant This is the company I work for that I've done some research on. design&write, 19 Feb 2008 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Design&write (talk • contribs) 21:12, 19 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The user Themfromspace has proposed to delete the list of Job Scheduling software products, because he says wikipedia is not a repository of links. In my opinion that list is very useful for someone who reads the article and wants to find out more about practical examples. One thing we could do is to create a new category or page named "List of job scheduling software", where we can transfer the current list. Simply deleting the list is not a good idea. --Jordiferrer (talk) 22:01, 30 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I removed the supplementary software section but this action was contested by User:Jordiferrer (see his rationale above), so I'm holding a request for comment on the matter. Is this section appropriate? Is it not? If not, what course of action should be taken about it? ThemFromSpace 22:45, 30 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• My view: I don't believe this section should be in the article and would support its removal. Wikipedia is not a directory, nor is it a repository for external links. The section is currently a laundry list of mostly nonnotable products which contains a lot of external links which violate our external links guidelines as they do not facilitate an encyclopedic understanding of the general topic of job schedulers. The list is overly long and indiscriminate as there is no criteria for inclusion. As such, it is a magnet for spam and only encourages growing listcruft. The list alone is not appropriate as the general topic of an article as there is nothing encyclopedic about writing about the list of Job scheduling programs as an entity, so the proposal above to move it elsewhere isn't in accordance with our guidelines on list articles. . ThemFromSpace 22:37, 30 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• My view: I agree the list is long with too many external links. I would propose to delete all external links and just keep the entries that have an internal link to an existing wikipedia page. Once cleaned, we should maybe create a list named "List of job scheduling software" Jordiferrer (talk) 11:10, 2 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I went ahead and removed it again, per WP:EL and because Wikipedia is not a directory. - MrOllie (talk) 18:57, 8 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"batch system, Distributed Resource Management System, and Distributed Resource Manager" are not synonyms for "job scheduler". They are related concepts, certainly, but it's as if Wikipedia were to say "fire trucks, airplanes, and trains" are synonyms for "car". Vixie cron is a job scheduler, but it's not any of those other things; many other examples exist.

Batch processing refers to the practice of creating "batches", composed of one or more programs, and running them sequentially as a single process or set of processes without allocating interactive terminal hardware such as a keyboard. Batches are not necessarily run by job schedulers, and job schedulers do not necessarily run batches - job schedulers are perfectly capable of kicking off interactive processes such as call center campaigns. Batches were run manually by operators before the widespread implementation of job schedulers.

Job scheduling refers to the practice of executing programs at pre-designated times or at regular intervals. The salient feature is chronological triggering of execution, unlike batching where the salient features are sequential ordering of multiple co-dependent jobs and little or no terminal interaction. For example, many email systems implement calendaring functions that include scheduling of reminder jobs that are fundamentally interactive - the end-user is presented with a reminder box that requires human response. Similarly, cron jobs that force programmers to take eyestrain breaks have to be considered interactive.

Further, the statement that job scheduling can be divided into a "mainframe era" based on JCL and an "open systems era" including everything else is frankly laughable. Products from DEC (such as RSX, RSTS/E, VMS) and many other companies (such as Burroughs, Honeywell, and Unisys) implemented job schedulers and batch processing that had nothing to do with JCL (which is a literal card-image language still widely used today to control batching on IBM systems) long before the phrase "open systems" became a computing shibboleth, and mainframes continue to be used despite the conncurrent use of equally ancient open system such as BSD unix. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 205.153.180.229 (talk) 14:58, 7 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I think this article conflates too many different things, and should try to separate them more clearly. E.g, I came here to read about batch queueing systems (which apparently is a synonym for job scheduler) for clusters (e.g. PBS or Gnu Queue), and clearly this is quite a different beast from cron. kzm (talk) 08:22, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

May I know why the last revision (20:59, 29 July 2011) reverted to 436965315? It added an example of a simple scheduler which is useful both for didactic purposes and in practical terms. 146.83.129.99 (talk)