I think that’s correct. From notes I’ve got for how we want to handle our
fairshare in the future:
Setting up a funded account (which can be assigned a fairshare):
sacctmgr add account member1 Description="Member1 Description" FairShare=N
Adding/removing a user to/from the funded account:
sacctmgr add user renfro account=member1 # for all partitions
sacctmgr add user renfro account=member1 partition=gpu # for
partition-specific fairshare
Modifying funded account fairshare:
sacctmgr modify account member1 set FairShare=N
Modifying funded account fairshare on specific partitions (e.g., if the entity
funded GPU nodes)
sacctmgr modify user renfro set FairShare=N where account=member1
partition=gpu
--
Mike Renfro, PhD / HPC Systems Administrator, Information Technology Services
931 372-3601 / Tennessee Tech University
> On Jun 12, 2020, at 3:52 AM, Diego Zuccato <diego.zucc...@unibo.it> wrote:
>
> Hello all.
>
> Is it possible to configure Slurm so that fairshare calc on a partition
> does not impact calc on a different one?
>
> We'd need to have different "priorities" on the "postprocessing" nodes
> than the ones on "parallel" nodes, so that even if an user already used
> up all his "quota" on "parallel" nodes but have never used
> "postprocessing", he'll have max prio when submitting jobs on
> "postprocessing".
>
> IIUC, it should be the case if the user have multiple associations
> (specifying a different partition for each one). Am I right?
>
> TIA.
>
> --
> Diego Zuccato
> DIFA - Dip. di Fisica e Astronomia
> Servizi Informatici
> Alma Mater Studiorum - Università di Bologna
> V.le Berti-Pichat 6/2 - 40127 Bologna - Italy
> tel.: +39 051 20 95786
>
