3.3 KiB
Product Overview
XCE is an HPC (High-Performance Computing) cluster management system providing job scheduling, queue management, and cluster resource control. It targets organizations running batch workloads on on-premises or air-gapped compute clusters who need deterministic scheduling, multi-tenant access control, and zero external database dependencies.
Core Capabilities
- Job lifecycle management — submit, start, stop, restart, kill, and monitor jobs including job arrays. Resource usage data is collected and exposed via API.
- Queue and scheduling — plugin-based scheduling engine for job-to-node placement with queue control (enable/disable) and expression-based resource filtering.
- Cluster and host management — node status monitoring (online/offline/unavailable), cluster topology tracking, and host control operations.
- Multi-tenant RBAC + pluggable auth — domain-based
action:scopepermission model (e.g.,job:view:self). Auth backends: configfile, LDAP, OAuth2, PAM. Built-in IP whitelist and rate limiting. - Controller persistence and HA — WAL + checkpoint-based single-controller persistence with LSF-style priority election for standby failover and live replication over TCP (Cap'n Proto serialization).
Target Use Cases
- Local HPC batch computing — long-running scientific/engineering workloads requiring deterministic scheduling, queue priority, and resource isolation.
- Air-gapped / secure environments — standalone deployments with file-based auth + SSL, no external cloud dependencies.
- Multi-team shared clusters — multiple teams sharing a cluster through RBAC with JWT token authentication.
- No-shared-storage HPC — controller uses local filesystem (ext4/xfs) for storage; job files transferred via API upload/download rather than network shares.
Value Proposition
XCE provides a fully integrated single-vendor stack (no database setup, unified build system) with an open, buildable codebase (Nix flakes, AppImage packaging). Compared to Slurm/PBS, it eliminates the external database requirement. Compared to commercial LSF, it is open source and reproducibly buildable.
Key architectural trade-off: single-writer model throughout — no multi-master consensus. HA failover uses LSF-style priority election (simple, predictable) rather than Raft (10× complexity). All controller state is in-memory; persistence is WAL + checkpoint, not a traditional database.
Active Development Context
The project is in a persistence and HA transformation (branch persistent_ha). Phases:
| Phase | Goal | Status |
|---|---|---|
| P0 | Restart survival (WAL + checkpoint) | Implementing |
| P1 | Standby election and takeover | Designed |
| P2 | Live replication primary → standby | Designed |
| P2.5 | Worker/scheduler auto-reconnect on failover | Designed |
| P3–P4 | Hardening, metrics, docs | Planned |
Key design decisions already locked:
- No
fork()for snapshots (mutex inheritance deadlock in multithreaded controller) - No Raft (single writer makes consensus overhead unjustified)
- No BoltDB (using dual zarray COW for application-level checkpointing)
- No application-layer encryption (trust OS boundary: chmod 0700, LUKS/dm-crypt)
- No WAL logging for job deletion (deferred to checkpoint time to simplify replay)