Results Slurm-3

    Slurm-3 ended Sunday: Intensive by Kubernetes.

    We set a personal record: 132 participants, 65 online and 67 in the hall.
    On the first Slurme there were 50 people, on the second 87. We are growing slowly.

    126 people created a cluster (task of the first day), and 115 completed the practice.
    6 people generally ignored the practice. We assume that they needed only lectures.

    The main fakap this time was associated with the broadcast: the speaker’s microphone was cut down, then the music was forgotten to be turned off. It is time to move from the collective farm method "professionals will understand" to the regulations.

    Two more problems were associated with git. First, the participants found assignment materials there and rushed to perform ahead of the locomotive. As a result, we reach practice, and the person has already broken everything there. Next time we will push materials as needed.

    We also made files with teams, because last time people copied commands from pdf along with formatting symbols, and nothing worked for them. Having found these files, some people cheerfully rushed to copy them to the console, and then complain that the practice was reduced to copy-peysta. The practice was reduced to the execution of tasks, configs and commands would be worth writing by hand, no one forced copyive.

    Fidbek gave 46 people. We assume that this is a representative slice of the audience.

    How do you like the intensity of Slurm?

    33: just right.
    10: too simple and slow, I would like more material
    3: too fast and difficult, I would like less material.

    We normally get into the stated audience: those who meet with Cubernette.
    For those to whom the usual Slurm seemed too simple, at the beginning of June MegaSlorm will take place. We give a discount of 15 thousand to all participants of the basic Slurm, Slurm-3 at least that way, but it will pay off.

    Has Kuburnetes become clear?

    16: I knew k8s before, now I know better.
    13: I did not know k8s before, now I figured it out.
    15: I do not understand k8s yet, but I see where to dig.
    2: I did not recognize anything new.
    0: I did not understand anything about k8s.

    The situation is even better than I imagined. I thought that at least half would say, “I don’t understand k8s yet, but I see where to dig,” and those who didn’t understand “k8s, now figured out” will practically not.

    The fun begins next. 6 people did not solve the problem, which went to Slurm. Four of them had specific requirements, we will take them into account when developing the MegaSlerm program. And I will give two reviews in full (with minimal editing):

    Monotonous narration with a pile of water
    Illiterate speech with a bunch of jargon
    A lot of time is spent on third-party trifles (change digits in configs for half an hour? Intensive, yes) Ceph
    are not

    This slurm is not for newbies or experienced ones.
    They irritated both slowness and speed, and as little information as possible:
    1. For some reason, the leaders rested on the details, in variables (vaguely explaining why they are needed).
    2. They quickly ran through the practice: "this is how ... hop-hop-hop works."
    3. In theory, only to Paul has the least of all questions, to the other speakers: why is it so depressing and uninteresting and I want you to finish quickly? Anyway, nothing is clear.
      At some moments I want to do this: What ??? What was it now ??? Why is this all ?? > Why, without explaining, run further ??? Someone does not work, but the presenter flies on ... SUSTAINABLE !!!
      In the end, I want to get up and leave, but 25 tr. set you back.

    It hurts me that these participants did not write to me on the first day. At the second Slurme there was a disgruntled man, he called me, asked for a refund, and we immediately turned off his access and returned the money.

    For the next Slurm I will prepare the return rules so as not to torment those who Slurm did not go to.

    But in general, 2 negative reviews for 46 respondents (and 132 participants) are close to the ideal.

    Finally. I was recently written by a member of Slurm-1, that he is still reviewing the records and finds something new in them. So graduating from Slurm doesn’t mean graduation.

    Thanks to everyone who was at Slurm!

    Anton Skobin

    Also popular now: