[slurm-users] FairShare value is always 0.

slurm.conf? This is kind of strange, because we have another cluster with pretty much the same configuration and the FairShare is calculated without any problems. Any help would be appreciated. -- Cumprimentos / Best Regards, Zacarias Benta LIP/INCD @ UMINHO -

Re: [slurm-users] Raise the priority of a certain kind of jobs

so may not be useful for queued jobs. Is there any possible way to do this? Thank you and look forward to your reply. Best, Jianwen -- *Cumprimentos / Best Regards,* Zacarias Benta INCD @ LIP - Universidade do Minho INCD Logo smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature

Re: [slurm-users] update_node / reason set to: slurm.conf / state set to DRAINED

rm.conf" message only appear after the update. Anyone else seen anything like this, espcially any of you who have just gone 20.02.5? Yours, diving into the source soon, Kevin -- *Cumprimentos / Best Regards,* Zacarias Benta INCD @ LIP - Universidade do Minho INCD Logo smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature

Re: [slurm-users] Job canceled after reaching QOS limits for CPU time.

And also the DMTCP project. On 30/10/2020 14:10, Thomas M. Payerle wrote: On Fri, Oct 30, 2020 at 5:37 AM Loris Bennett mailto:loris.benn...@fu-berlin.de>> wrote: Hi Zacarias, Zacarias Benta mailto:zacar...@lip.pt>> writes: > Good morning everyone. >

Re: [slurm-users] Job canceled after reaching QOS limits for CPU time.

..@fu-berlin.de>> wrote: Hi Zacarias, Zacarias Benta mailto:zacar...@lip.pt>> writes: > Good morning everyone. > > I'm having a "issue", I don't know if it is a "bug or a feature". > I've created a QOS: "s

Re: [slurm-users] Job canceled after reaching QOS limits for CPU time.

Hi Zacarias, Zacarias Benta writes: Good morning everyone. I'm having a "issue", I don't know if it is a "bug or a feature". I've created a QOS: "sacctmgr add qos myqos set GrpTRESMins=cpu=10 flags=NoDecay". I know the limit it too low, but I just wa

[slurm-users] Job canceled after reaching QOS limits for CPU time.

ced, what I'm trying to prevent is for example, a person having a job running for 2 months and at the end not having any data because they just needed a few more days. This could be prevented if I could grant them a couple more days of cpu, if the job went on to a pending state after reaching

Re: [slurm-users] Multi-node job failure

and Atmospheric Agency > Great Lakes Environmental Research Laboratory > 4840 S State Rd | Ann Arbor, MI 48108 > 734-741-2446 -- Cumprimentos / Best Regards, Zacarias Benta INCD @ LIP - UMinho

[slurm-users] Jobs stop after 1:05:11 with segmentation faul.

hey all finish ok. Does anyone have any idea how to debug this issue? Cumprimentos / Best Regards, Zacarias Benta INCD @ LIP - UMinho