|
|
@ -673,45 +673,21 @@ arbitrary number of tasks with other types.
|
|
|
|
### Evaluation progress state
|
|
|
|
### Evaluation progress state
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Users surely want to know a progress state of their submitted solution. The very
|
|
|
|
Users surely want to know a progress state of their submitted solution. The very
|
|
|
|
first idea would be to report state based on done messages from compilation,
|
|
|
|
first idea would be to report a state based on done messages from compilation,
|
|
|
|
execution and evaluation as a lot of evaluation systems are already providing.
|
|
|
|
execution and evaluation as a lot of evaluation systems are already providing.
|
|
|
|
However the ReCodEx have more advanced execution pipeline where there can be
|
|
|
|
However the ReCodEx have more advanced execution pipeline where there can be
|
|
|
|
more compilations or more executions per test and also other technical tasks
|
|
|
|
more compilations or more executions per test and also other technical tasks
|
|
|
|
controlling the job execution flow. The users do not know about these technical
|
|
|
|
controlling the job execution flow. The users do not know about these technical
|
|
|
|
details and data from this tasks may confuse them.
|
|
|
|
details and data from this tasks may confuse them. A solution is to show users
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
only percentual completion of the job without additional information about task
|
|
|
|
A solution is to show users only percentual completion of the job as a plain
|
|
|
|
types. This solution works well for all of the jobs and is very user friendly.
|
|
|
|
progress bar without additional information about task types. This solution
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
works well for all of the jobs and is very user friendly. To make the output
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
more interesting, there is a database of random kind-of-funny statements and a
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
random new one is displayed every time a task is completed.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
### Results of evaluation
|
|
|
|
### Results of evaluation
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
There are lot of things which deserves discussion concerning results of
|
|
|
|
The evaluation data have to be processed and then presented in human readable
|
|
|
|
evaluation, how they should be displayed, what should be visible or not and also
|
|
|
|
form. This is done through a one numeric value called points. Also, results of
|
|
|
|
what kind of reward for users solutions should be chosen.
|
|
|
|
job tests should be available to know what kind of error is in the solution. For
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
more debugging, outputs of tasks could be optionally available for the users.
|
|
|
|
#### Evaluation outputs
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
At first let us focus on all kinds of outputs from executed programs within job.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Out of discussion is that supervisors should be able to view almost all outputs
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
from solutions if they choose them to be visible and recorded. This feature is
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
critical in debugging either whole exercises or users solutions. Supervisor
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
should have a choice to turn on preserving the data while the default behaviour
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
is to discard them to keep a file base around whole ReCodEx system in sensible
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
limits.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
More interesting question is if students should see the logs from execution of
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
their solution. Usual approach is to keep these information private because of
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
possibility of leaking input data. This may lead students to hack their
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
solutions to pass just the ReCodEx testing cases instead of properly solving the
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
assigned problem. Martin Mareš strongly recommended to use this strategy of
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
hiding sensitive data too, so ReCodEx does. One exception are compilation
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
outputs which can help students a lot during troubleshooting. These logs shall
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
be visible unless the supervisor decides otherwise. Note, that due to lack of
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
frontend developers, this feature was not implemented in the very first release
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
of ReCodEx, but will be definitely available in the future.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#### Scoring and assigning points
|
|
|
|
#### Scoring and assigning points
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
@ -739,8 +715,8 @@ error" which is the valid answer in two tests), a minimal point threshold can be
|
|
|
|
specified. It the solution is to get less points than specified, it will get
|
|
|
|
specified. It the solution is to get less points than specified, it will get
|
|
|
|
zero points instead. This functionality can be embedded into grading computation
|
|
|
|
zero points instead. This functionality can be embedded into grading computation
|
|
|
|
algoritm itself, but it would have to be present in each implementation
|
|
|
|
algoritm itself, but it would have to be present in each implementation
|
|
|
|
separately, which is a bit ugly. So, this feature is separated from point
|
|
|
|
separately, which is not maintainable. Because of this the the threshold feature
|
|
|
|
computation.
|
|
|
|
is separated from point computation.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Automatic grading cannot reflect all aspects of submitted code. For example,
|
|
|
|
Automatic grading cannot reflect all aspects of submitted code. For example,
|
|
|
|
structuring the code, number and quality of comments and so on. To allow
|
|
|
|
structuring the code, number and quality of comments and so on. To allow
|
|
|
@ -754,6 +730,25 @@ even student submitting the same code again which evaluates to more points,
|
|
|
|
supervisor can mark a particular solution as marked and used for grading instead
|
|
|
|
supervisor can mark a particular solution as marked and used for grading instead
|
|
|
|
of solution with the most points.
|
|
|
|
of solution with the most points.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#### Evaluation outputs
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
In addition to the exact measured values used for score calculation described in
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
previous chapter, there are also text or binary outputs of the executed tasks.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Knowing them helps users identify and solve their potential issues, but on the
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
other hand this can lead to possibility of leaking input data. This may lead
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
students to hack their solutions to pass just the ReCodEx testing cases instead
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
of properly solving the assigned problem. The usual approach is to keep these
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
information private and so does strongly recommended Martin Mareš, who has
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
experience with several programming contests.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The only one exception of hiding the logs are compilation outputs, which can
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
help students a lot during troubleshooting and there is only small possibility
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
of input data leakage. The supervisors have access to all of the logs and they
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
can decide if students are allowed to see the compilation outputs.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Note, that due to lack of frontend developers, showing compilation logs to the
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
students is not implemented in the very first release of ReCodEx.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
### Persistence
|
|
|
|
### Persistence
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Previous parts of analysis show that the system has to keep some state. This
|
|
|
|
Previous parts of analysis show that the system has to keep some state. This
|
|
|
@ -941,20 +936,46 @@ However, all of the three options would have been possible to use.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
### File transfers
|
|
|
|
### File transfers
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
There has to be a way to access files stored on the fileserver from both workers
|
|
|
|
There has to be a way to access files stored on the fileserver from both worker
|
|
|
|
and clients. We will present some of the possible options:
|
|
|
|
and frontend server machines. The protocol used for this should handle large
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
files efficiently and be resilient to network failures. Security features are
|
|
|
|
@todo elaborate this stuff
|
|
|
|
not a primary concern, because all communication with the fileserver will happen
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
in an internal network. However, a basic form of authentication can be useful to
|
|
|
|
- HTTP(S)
|
|
|
|
ensure correct configuration (if a development fileserver uses different
|
|
|
|
- FTP
|
|
|
|
credentials than production, production workers will not be able to use it by
|
|
|
|
- SFTP
|
|
|
|
accident). Lastly, the protocol must have a client library for platforms
|
|
|
|
- A network-shared file system (such as NFS)
|
|
|
|
(languages) used in the backend. We will present some of the possible options:
|
|
|
|
- A custom protocol over ZeroMQ
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- HTTP(S) -- a de-facto standard for web communication that has far more
|
|
|
|
We chose HTTPS because it is widely used and clients exist in all relevant
|
|
|
|
features than just file transfers. Thanks to being used on the web, a large
|
|
|
|
environments. In addition, it is highly probable we will have to run an HTTP
|
|
|
|
effort has been put into the development of its servers. It supports
|
|
|
|
server, because it is intended for ReCodEx to have a web frontend.
|
|
|
|
authentication and it can handle short-term network failures (thanks to being
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
built on TCP and supporting resuming interrupted transfers). We will use HTTP
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
for communication with clients, so there is no added cost in maintaining a
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
server. HTTP requests can be made using libcurl.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- FTP -- an old protocol designed only for transferring files. It has all the
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
required features, but doesn't offer anything over HTTP. It is also supported
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by libcurl.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- SFTP -- a file transfer protocol most frequently used as a subsystem of the
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
SSH protocol implementations. It doesn't provide authentication, but it
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
supports working with large files and resuming failed transfers. The libcurl
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
library supports SFTP.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- A network-shared file system (such as NFS) -- an obvious advantage of a
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
network-shared file system is that applications can work with remote files the
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
same way they would with local files. However, it brings an overhead for the
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
administrator, who has to configure access to this filesystem for every
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
machine that needs to access the storage.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- A custom protocol over ZeroMQ -- it is possible to design a custom file
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
transfer protocol that uses ZeroMQ for sending data, but it is not a trivial
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
task -- we would have to find a way to transfer large files efficiently,
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
implement an acknowledgement scheme and support resuming transfers. Using
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ZeroMQ as the underlying layer does not help a lot with this. The sole
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
advantage of this is that the backend components would not need another
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
library for communication.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
We chose HTTPS because it is widely used and client libraries exist in all
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
relevant environments. In addition, it is highly probable we will have to run an
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
HTTP server, because it is intended for ReCodEx to have a web frontend.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
### Frontend - backend communication
|
|
|
|
### Frontend - backend communication
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|