Lachlan,  forgive me if I am teaching granny to suck eggs..,,
I have recently been workign with cgroups.
If you run an interactive job what do you see when  cat /proc/self/cgroups
Also have you explored in /sys/fs/cgroups and checked what resources are in
the cgroups which a job has?

On 14 August 2017 at 07:49, Lachlan Musicman <[email protected]> wrote:

> Hola,
>
> Slurm is complicated software, and sometimes the docs can be dense - I'm
> looking for some clarification please.
>
> We have a system set up with Threads as CPUs. 1 socket, 4 cores, 2 threads
> = 8 cpus
>
> I would like to implement CGroups because some of our users are quite
> happy to utilise all threads despite other users.
>
> We have TaskPlugin=task/cgroup and when testing I noticed that the # of
> threads/cpus being allocated was rounded up to the nearest even. I presume
> this was due to cgroups marking a core as a cpu, rather than a thread as a
> cpu.
>
> So I set TaskPluginParam=Threads, but slurm is still allowing the use of
> more threads than have been requested.
>
> In particular, I'm running this test:
>
> #!/bin/bash
> #SBATCH --nodes=1
> #SBATCH --ntasks=3
>
> stress-ng --cpu 5 --cpu-method all --io 5 --vm 1 --vm-bytes 1G --timeout
> 600s --quiet
>
>
> I was hoping that the cgroup would kill the job because of too many cpus,
> but that's not how stress-ng works I've discovered.
>
> Regardless, when running this, I noted that squeue shows I've been
> allocated 3 CPUs, but on the server itself, I'm seeing four cpus being used?
>
> What have I done wrong? Is it possible to have granular control at the
> thread level with cgroups?
>
> cheers
> L.
>
>
> ------
> "The antidote to apocalypticism is *apocalyptic civics*. Apocalyptic
> civics is the insistence that we cannot ignore the truth, nor should we
> panic about it. It is a shared consciousness that our institutions have
> failed and our ecosystem is collapsing, yet we are still here — and we are
> creative agents who can shape our destinies. Apocalyptic civics is the
> conviction that the only way out is through, and the only way through is
> together. "
>
> *Greg Bloom* @greggish https://twitter.com/greggish/
> status/873177525903609857
>

Reply via email to