On 09-08-2022 01:11, David Magda wrote:
On Aug 6, 2022, at 15:13, Chris Samuel wrote:
It's also safe to restart slurmd's with running jobs, though you may want to
drain them before that so slurmctld won't try and send them a job in the middle.
My testing has shown that this is not the case:
On Aug 6, 2022, at 15:13, Chris Samuel wrote:
>
> On 6/8/22 10:43 am, David Magda wrote:
>
>> It seems that the the new srun(1) cannot talk to the old slurmd(8).
>> Is this 'on purpose'? Does the backwards compatibility of the protocol not
>> extend to srun(1)?
>
> That's expected, what you're
Following up with a bit more specific color as to what I’m seeing, as well as a
solution that I’m ashamed I didn’t come back to it.
If there is exclusively tier3 work queued up, gang scheduling never comes into
play.
If there is tier3+tier1 work queued up, tier1 gets requeued, and tier3 preempt
It looks to me like you have the same node in multiple partitions. If
the output you are getting is basically what you want just pipe it to
'sort -u' or 'uniq'
Brian Andrus
On 8/8/2022 10:14 AM, Borchert, Christopher B ERDC-RDE-ITL-MS CIV wrote:
Hello. How can I simply show the status of a no
On 08-08-2022 19:14, Borchert, Christopher B ERDC-RDE-ITL-MS CIV wrote:
Hello. How can I simply show the status of a node in Slurm? It repeats the
same output per partition even when the partition column isn't included.
$ sinfo -N -o '%N %a %t'
NODELIST AVAIL STATE
roy-r1-cp15b up idle
roy-r1-cp
I’ve got essentially 3 “tiers” of jobs.
tier1 are stateless and can be requeued
tier2 are stateful and can be suspended
tier3 are “high priority” and can preempt tier1 and tier2 with the requisite
preemption modes.
> $ sacctmgr show qos format=name%10,priority%10,preempt%12,preemptmode%10
>
Going in a completely different direction than you’d planned, but for the same
goal, what about making a script (shell, Python, or otherwise) that could
validate all the constraints and call the scontrol program if appropriate, and
then run that script via “sudo” as one of the regular users?
Fr
I've hit an issue with binding using slurm 21.08.5 that I'm hoping someone
might be able to help with. I took a scan through the e-mail list but didn't
see this one - apologies if I missed it. Maybe I just need a better
understanding on why this is happening but feels like a bug.
The issue is
Hello,
I’m planning to develop a plugin for SLURM that would allow regular users to
create reservations respecting some specific constraints on time/resources
requested.
Do you think it would be feasible to implement it as a plugin, or that would
necessarily require modification of SLURM code? I
Hello Miguel,
Setting the limit to only one QOS works indeed but it prevents usage of several
QOS for all users, and all the multi QOS possibilities.
I'm thinking about how I can manage with it and if it's possible to set up a
workaround in our environment.
Thanks for all your help.
Cordi
10 matches
Mail list logo
