[gridengine users] serial and mpi jobs running on the same nodes

Reuti reuti at Staff.Uni-Marburg.DE
Tue Jan 27 10:54:39 UTC 2015


> Am 27.01.2015 um 09:26 schrieb Ursula Winkler <ursula.winkler at uni-graz.at>:
> On 01/26/2015 10:03 PM, Reuti wrote:
>>> I'll trying to find a solution for an environment running serial jobs as well as mpi jobs on
>>> 6 hosts where each host has 32 cores/slots. Due to the small number of nodes, assigning
>>> each sort of jobs to separate nodes (e.g. nodes 1-2 for serial, nodes 3-6 for mpi jobs) is
>>> not an option, expecially because the ratio serial:mpi is quite a variable one.
>>> I tried out to set up 2 queues with "serial" as a subordinate queue to "mpi". - But that
>>> only is unwasteful if the mpi job(s) use ~ 32 slots per host. Otherwise there are serial
>>> jobs which could run but persist unnecessarily in a suspended state due to the fact
>>> that the whole queue "serial" is suspended.
>>> The other possible option should be the subordination of slots, but that doesn't work either
>>> because the scheduler obviously (concerning subordination) is not capable of figuring out how many slots a mpi job actually is requesting, and so suspends stubbornly only one serial job -
>>> which of course causes core oversubscription.
>>> Has somebody an idea to solve this problem in a satisfying way?
>> Why not submitting all jobs to one and the same queue?
>> It might be good to provide a suitable:
>> $ qconf -ssconf
>> ...
>> max_reservation                   20
>> default_duration                  8760:00:00
>> and submit the parallel jobs with "-R y" to avoid starvation. To use the backfilling in a proper way a value h_rt  needs to be provided too during submission.
>> -- Reuti
> Hi,
> I hoped I could avoid that. On all the other clusters we have separated nodes for each queue and that works fine without runtime limitations/requestions. I wanted to provide the same (usage) conditions also on the new cluster, but ok, if it should not be...

And you are submitting to queues then (this would be more Torque-style submissions)? You could also use hostgroups to have different parts in the cluster which you can address. What was the idea to have different queues for different parts of the clusters?

To me it sounds like the setup of the new cluster (shared usage per exechosts) is different from the goal in the other clusters where only a single queue was set up on each machine (resp. a single queue for each part of the cluster)

-- Reuti

> I'll set the configuration changes as you proposed and see how it works.
> Thank you, Reuti.
> Ursula
> _______________________________________________
> users mailing list
> users at gridengine.org
> https://gridengine.org/mailman/listinfo/users

More information about the users mailing list