# Interactive jobs missing

**URL:** <https://discourse.openondemand.org/t/interactive-jobs-missing/3105>\
**Category:** Get Help\
**Created:** [November 18, 2023, 4:58am UTC](https://discourse.openondemand.org/t/interactive-jobs-missing/3105 "2023-11-18T04:58:40Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 3\
**Page:** 1

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![rarensu](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/flex015/user_avatar/discourse.openondemand.org/rarensu/32/867_2.png) [@rarensu](https://discourse.openondemand.org/u/rarensu)\
**Post date:** [November 18, 2023, 4:58am UTC](https://discourse.openondemand.org/t/interactive-jobs-missing/3105/1 "2023-11-18T04:58:40Z")

</div>

Howdy,  
I have a group of users who noticed that sometimes when they try to launch interactive jobs, if the request times out (e.g., flaky long distance connection), that they can end up in a weird state where there is no job card on the interactive jobs page but the job is actually running. This particular group has learned to work around it by manually constructing an appropriate URL to reach their running job.

 ![theActualJupyterSession](https://us1.discourse-cdn.com/flex015/uploads/osc/original/2X/4/496ade0c590f6071e11bd6197ba945a789aa2e1f.png)  
 ![MyInteractiveSessions](https://us1.discourse-cdn.com/flex015/uploads/osc/original/2X/c/cd455c3be6806eabb0908a3e269f88c4c9cce1b3.png)

However, I feel that is really bad because users who don’t know that this is a possible outcome will assume that the job didn’t launch and launch a second job, while the first job continues to burn away their CPU allocation units and take up space on the cluster. Imagine, for example, a machine-learning user’s interactive jupyter notebook requesting multiple GPUs effectively taking an entire node offline. The user later wonders where all their CPU allocation units are going.

If this is not a known issue, I would like to submit a bug report. I assume I would need to provide some additional technical details for reproduction.  
Richard Lawrence  
Texas A&M

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![jeff.ohrstrom](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/flex015/user_avatar/discourse.openondemand.org/jeff.ohrstrom/32/136_2.png) [@jeff.ohrstrom](https://discourse.openondemand.org/u/jeff.ohrstrom)\
**Post date:** [November 20, 2023, 3:58pm UTC](https://discourse.openondemand.org/t/interactive-jobs-missing/3105/2 "2023-11-20T15:58:45Z")

</div>

Unfortunately I don’t think there’s a good solution for you here. I’ve created this ticket upstream for the same. As a guess, I’m guessing we could have some re-try logic so that if it fails, we can check another 1-2 times to ensure that it’s actually complete.

> <https://github.com/OSC/ondemand/issues/3198>
>
> From discourse - https://discourse.openondemand.org/t/interactive-jobs-missing/3…105
> 
> It appears that we're able to lose the session. I'm guessing this is because of some inter-connectivity issue with the scheduler. Here's what I believe is happening
> 
> \* job correctly submitted
> \* card created
> \* user connects to the app
> \* while updating the card, we lose connectivity to the scheduler and the system the assumes (erroneously) that the job is complete because the scheduler does not return correctly.
> \* The system (erroneously) removes the card

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![system](https://us1.discourse-cdn.com/flex015/uploads/osc/original/2X/b/bae70bd0ed39a3ae769c2108155f4cb3e9da8385.png) [@system](https://discourse.openondemand.org/u/system)\
**Post date:** [May 18, 2024, 3:59pm UTC](https://discourse.openondemand.org/t/interactive-jobs-missing/3105/3 "2024-05-18T15:59:39Z")

</div>

This topic was automatically closed 180 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.