...ok... sure.... I had no idea where the "parent" label came from. This makes perfect sense. It will default to "1", I think.
On Sat, Aug 10, 2024 at 12:24 PM Ryan Cox <ryan_...@byu.edu> wrote: > fairshare=parent sets the user association to effectively compete at the > account level, so this is behaving as intended. It's effectively ignoring > the users' usage when competing with others inside the same account. That > is not want you want. Give them all the same numeric value, not parent. > > Fair Tree (the default) handles a single account just fine, but you do not > want fairshare=parent there either. > > Ryan > > On 8/10/24 08:05, Drucker, Daniel via slurm-users wrote: > > And now, a few hours later - with no changes made - everyone has the same > fairshare? > > $ sshare -l -a > Account User RawShares NormShares RawUsage > NormUsage EffectvUsage FairShare GrpTRESMins > TRESRunMins > -------------------- ---------- ---------- ----------- ----------- > ----------- ------------- ---------- ------------------------------ > ------------------------------ > root 0.000000 63235972 > 0.000000 1.000000 > cpu=188835,mem=1546941371,ene+ > root root 1 0.008264 0 > 0.000000 0.000000 1.000000 > cpu=0,mem=0,energy=0,node=0,b+ > mic 120 0.991736 63235972 > 1.000000 1.000000 0.497120 > cpu=188835,mem=1546941371,ene+ > mic aamedina parent 0.991736 2351906 > 0.037193 1.000000 0.497120 > cpu=0,mem=0,energy=0,node=0,b+ > mic aaruldass parent 0.991736 0 > 0.000000 1.000000 0.497120 > cpu=0,mem=0,energy=0,node=0,b+ > mic acataldo parent 0.991736 14637614 > 0.231476 1.000000 0.497120 > cpu=188031,mem=1540350361,ene+ > mic achowdhury parent 0.991736 0 > 0.000000 1.000000 0.497120 > cpu=0,mem=0,energy=0,node=0,b+ > mic ajajoo parent 0.991736 2053441 > 0.032473 1.000000 0.497120 > cpu=0,mem=0,energy=0,node=0,b+ > mic ajanes parent 0.991736 0 > 0.000000 1.000000 0.497120 > cpu=0,mem=0,energy=0,node=0,b+ > mic amandacao parent 0.991736 200 > 0.000003 1.000000 0.497120 > cpu=0,mem=0,energy=0,node=0,b+ > mic aromer parent 0.991736 0 > 0.000000 1.000000 0.497120 > cpu=0,mem=0,energy=0,node=0,b+ > mic aweerasek+ parent 0.991736 1048 > 0.000017 1.000000 0.497120 > cpu=0,mem=0,energy=0,node=0,b+ > mic batwood parent 0.991736 0 > 0.000000 1.000000 0.497120 > cpu=0,mem=0,energy=0,node=0,b+ > mic bleng parent 0.991736 3 > 0.000000 1.000000 0.497120 > cpu=0,mem=0,energy=0,node=0,b+ > mic cdemirlek parent 0.991736 6110 > 0.000097 1.000000 0.497120 > cpu=0,mem=0,energy=0,node=0,b+ > mic chun parent 0.991736 0 > 0.000000 1.000000 0.497120 > cpu=0,mem=0,energy=0,node=0,b+ > > > I am so confused. > > > > On Aug 10, 2024, at 8:11 AM, Drucker, Daniel <ddruc...@mclean.harvard.edu> > <ddruc...@mclean.harvard.edu> wrote: > > Hmm, no. That solved the problem of everyone having the same FairShare, > but even after restarting slurmd and doing reconfigure, if I submit a job > as someone with a huge usage and someone with zero usage, they both end up > with the same Priority. > > > > On Aug 10, 2024, at 8:05 AM, Daniel M. Drucker > <ddruc...@mclean.harvard.edu> <ddruc...@mclean.harvard.edu> wrote: > > I just set > PriorityFlags=NO_FAIR_TREE > and this seems to have solved the problem! > > > > > On Aug 10, 2024, at 7:45 AM, Drucker, Daniel <ddruc...@mclean.harvard.edu> > <ddruc...@mclean.harvard.edu> wrote: > > According to https://docs.rc.fas.harvard.edu/kb/fairshare/ and > https://slurm.schedmd.com/SUG14/fair_tree.pdf : > > > "The Fairshare score is calculated using the following formula.f = > 2^(-EffectvUsage/NormShares)" > > This is clearly not happening on my system: > > Account User RawShares NormShares RawUsage > NormUsage EffectvUsage FairShare LevelFS > GrpTRESMins TRESRunMins > -------------------- ---------- ---------- ----------- ----------- > ----------- ------------- ---------- ---------- > ------------------------------ ------------------------------ > ... > mic acataldo parent 0.991736 13066208 > 0.210193 0.210193 0.983871 > cpu=169648,mem=1389757781,ene+ > mic achowdhury parent 0.991736 0 > 0.000000 0.000000 0.983871 > cpu=0,mem=0,energy=0,node=0,b+ > ... > > > Every user has 0.991736 NormShares. > Acataldo has EffectvUsage = 0.210193 > Achowdhury has EffectvUsage = 0 > > But both users have the same FairShare. The correct values according to > the above formula would be 0.863 and 1.0 respectively. > > So what's going on? > > > > On Aug 10, 2024, at 7:36 AM, Daniel M. Drucker > <ddruc...@mclean.harvard.edu> <ddruc...@mclean.harvard.edu> wrote: > > Here is what is confusing me I guess. Look at the below. You can see that > some people have no usage and some people have a lot of usage. But their > FairShare value is all identical. > > > https://lists.schedmd.com/mailman3/hyperkitty/list/slurm-users@lists.schedmd.com/thread/I53OEJSNBT2BMXYVFEFHQQKKAHIUYA53/ > seems to say that fairshare=parent should work just fine, but what I am > seeing is that it is NOT altering people's FairShare? > > > > > > > > > The information in this e-mail is intended only for the person to whom it > is addressed. If you believe this e-mail was sent to you in error and the > e-mail contains patient information, please contact the Mass General > Brigham Compliance HelpLine at > https://www.massgeneralbrigham.org/complianceline . > > Please note that this e-mail is not secure (encrypted). If you do not > wish to continue communication over unencrypted e-mail, please notify the > sender of this message immediately. Continuing to send or respond to > e-mail after receiving this message means you understand and accept this > risk and wish to continue to communicate over unencrypted e-mail. > > >
-- slurm-users mailing list -- slurm-users@lists.schedmd.com To unsubscribe send an email to slurm-users-le...@lists.schedmd.com
