[slurm-dev] Re: Restrict access for a user group to certain nodes

submit jobs to those certain nodes to perform some tests, which might be disturbed by users submitting their jobs to those nodes. Various Search Engines didn't offer answers to my question, which is why I'm writing you here. Looking forward to some answers! Best, Felix Willenborg -- Magnus Jonsson

[slurm-dev] Re: sacct vs sacct -X

imeRAW -- -- -- 736485100:00:00 16 0 /Magnus On 2016-03-23 09:29, Magnus Jonsson wrote: Hi! From this simple example could someone explain to me if this is the expected behaviour or a bug? $ srun -n1 --exclusive hostname srun: job 4232239

[slurm-dev] Re: sacct vs sacct -X

0 sacct -X --format=JobID,Elapsed,AllocCPUS,CPUTimeRaw -j 7364851 JobIDElapsed AllocCPUS CPUTimeRAW -- -- -- 736485100:00:00 16 0 /Magnus On 2016-03-23 09:29, Magnus Jonsson wrote: Hi! From this simple example

[slurm-dev] sacct vs sacct -X

)? Best regards, Magnus -- Magnus Jonsson, Developer, HPC2N, Umeå Universitet smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature

[slurm-dev] Re: As a user how can I re-order my job submissions

wouldn’t want this, because users could misuse this feature. But from a user perspective I could genuinely have some dependencies that I would like to have it addressed before beginning my batch of thousands of jobs. Any help here is greatly appreciated. Regards, Amit -- Magnus Jonsson, Developer

[slurm-dev] sbcast, prolog and SPANK.

srun cp ${PATH_TO_FILES}/* $TMPDIR/ Also this has the side effect that the prolog on the node is not run until you actually send a job to the node. I.e. you can send data to a node with sbcast before the prolog this might not be an expected/wanted behaviour. Best, Magnus -- Magnus Jonsson

[slurm-dev] Re: prevent slurm from parsing the full script

job2.sh If I submit the job1.sh the resources are allocated such that 2 tasks are given and not 1. I would like to have 1 task for the first job (as in the very first lines) and then a different setting for the created job ... Thanx for any help, Hendryk -- Magnus Jonsson, Developer, HPC2N

[slurm-dev] Re: prevent slurm from parsing the full script

, Hendryk -- Magnus Jonsson, Developer, HPC2N, Umeå Universitet smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature

[slurm-dev] A way of abuse the priority option in Slurm?

the priority at all? The user can use the 'nice' option to alter the priority of a job within a small limit that does not alter the priority as defined above. Please let me be wrong :-) /Magnus -- Magnus Jonsson, Developer, HPC2N, Umeå Universitet smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic

[slurm-dev] Slurm restart count in SPANK

pretty sure it worked on in 2.6 (it was when we developed our tmpdir spank plugin). SLURM_RESTART_COUNT is available in the job user environment. /Magnus -- Magnus Jonsson, Developer, HPC2N, Umeå Universitet smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature

[slurm-dev] Re: Job on wrong node

else is the matter. Perhaps routing tables or something else. U -- Magnus Jonsson, Developer, HPC2N, Umeå Universitet smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature

[slurm-dev] Re: Changed behaviour of --exclusive in srun (job step context)

Is no one else affected by this? /Magnus On 2014-09-11 14:46, Magnus Jonsson wrote: Hi! A user found a strange new behaviour when using --exclusive with srun. I have an example submit-script[1] that shows this. I have tested this on 2.6.4 with the output [2] [3] (stderr) and on 14.03.7

[slurm-dev] Changed behaviour of --exclusive in srun (job step context)

.2.6.4 3, http://www.hpc2n.umu.se/staff/magnus/slurm/stderr.2.6.4 4, http://www.hpc2n.umu.se/staff/magnus/slurm/stdout.14.03.7 5, http://www.hpc2n.umu.se/staff/magnus/slurm/stderr.14.03.7 -- Magnus Jonsson, Developer, HPC2N, Umeå Universitet smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature

[slurm-dev] Killing the backfill...

on events that actually affects the scheduling of the queue? Best regards, Magnus -- Magnus Jonsson, Developer, HPC2N, Umeå Universitet smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature

[slurm-dev] Re: Killing the backfill...

On 2014-05-20 14:54, Tommi T wrote: On Tuesday, May 20, 2014 1:51 PM, Magnus Jonsson mag...@hpc2n.umu.se wrote: Hi! While investigating an other matter I found that if you have lots of jobs running with short job steps they killing the backfill very effective. Hi, Do you use bf_continue

[slurm-dev] Change node weight based on partition? QOS? other?

? Best regards, Magnus -- Magnus Jonsson, Developer, HPC2N, Umeå Universitet smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature

[slurm-dev] RE: --exclusive together with --ntasks-per-node not working as expected.

srun -l -N2 --tasks-per-node=2 hostname 1: trek0 0: trek0 2: trek1 3: trek1 -Original Message- From: Magnus Jonsson [mailto:mag...@hpc2n.umu.se] Sent: Wednesday, February 19, 2014 1:28 AM To: slurm-dev Subject: [slurm-dev] --exclusive together with --ntasks-per-node not working

[slurm-dev] Only allow some nodes in an partition to run jobs that stay within one node.

but this might also confuse the users. Best regards, Magnus -- Magnus Jonsson, Developer, HPC2N, Umeå Universitet smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature

[slurm-dev] Re: Bad behaviour of slurm with -c

1313514: More processors requested than permitted Oct 4 15:23:03 t-mn02 slurmctld[28426]: completing job 1313514 Oct 4 15:23:03 t-mn02 slurmctld[28426]: sched: job_complete for JobId=1313514 successful, exit code=256 -- Magnus Jonsson, Developer, HPC2N, Umeå Universitet -- Magnus Jonsson

[slurm-dev] Expected start time far, far away...

that are that far in the future should not be allowed to appear. If the starttime is more then a week or two into the future the starttime will probably not be that accurate anyway. Best regards, Magnus -- Magnus Jonsson, Developer, HPC2N, Umeå Universitet smime.p7s Description: S/MIME

[slurm-dev] Bad behaviour of slurm with -c

processors requested than permitted Oct 4 15:23:03 t-mn02 slurmctld[28426]: completing job 1313514 Oct 4 15:23:03 t-mn02 slurmctld[28426]: sched: job_complete for JobId=1313514 successful, exit code=256 -- Magnus Jonsson, Developer, HPC2N, Umeå Universitet # # See the slurm.conf man page

[slurm-dev] Bug in squeue command.

the expected behaviour. Best regards, Magnus -- Magnus Jonsson, Developer, HPC2N, Umeå Universitet smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature

[slurm-dev] Re: strftime issue(s).

will be a better solution than changing the code in various places. See attached variation of your patch. Moe Quoting Magnus Jonsson mag...@hpc2n.umu.se: Hi! We found an issue in sacct that we pined down to a strftime call in 'src/common/parse_time.c' (slurm_make_time_str). Reproducable with (in 2.5

[slurm-dev] issue with task/affinity and srun --exclusive

--get | ./hex2bin results in: 00 00 01 01 01 01 01 01 = 0x41041041 This is also looks like the bitmask that task/affinity gets from slurm. Best regards, Magnus -- Magnus Jonsson, Developer, HPC2N, Umeå Universitet smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic

[slurm-dev] sbatch --exclusive --mem-per-cpu

understand it this will give the wrong input for the fair share scheduler and results the wrong priority (to high) for the user. Best regards, Magnus -- Magnus Jonsson, Developer, HPC2N, Umeå Universitet smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature

[slurm-dev] cons_res select_p_select_nodeinfo_set_all problem with multiple partitions.

to bitstring to count the number of bits in an range (bit_set_count_range) and made a minor improvement of (bit_set_count) while reviewing the range version. Best regards, Magnus -- Magnus Jonsson, Developer, HPC2N, Umeå Universitet diff -ru site/src/common/bitstring.c amd64_ubuntu1004/src/common

[slurm-dev] Re: Licenses verification mechanism

anybody have experience with the case where job (or some script) checks some condition periodically and stay in a queue if the condition has not been complied yet? -- Taras -- Magnus Jonsson, Developer, HPC2N, Umeå Universitet smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature

[slurm-dev] Buffer overflow bug + patch.

Hi! I just found a bug in the slurm that creates a buffer overflow if you run 'scontrol show config'. Patch attached to fix the problem. /Magnus -- Magnus Jonsson, Developer, HPC2N, Umeå Universitet diff --git a/src/common/slurm_protocol_defs.c b/src/common/slurm_protocol_defs.c index

[slurm-dev] task/affinity, --cpu_bind=socket and -c 1

, SLURM_DIST_BLOCK be the same as default? Best regards, Magnus -- Magnus Jonsson, Developer, HPC2N, Umeå Universitet smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature

[slurm-dev] Re: Disable black hole nodes automatically

, but that's not why we do it -- Richard P. Feynman -- Magnus Jonsson, Developer, HPC2N, Umeå Universitet smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature

[slurm-dev] Re: Patch for partition based SelectType (CR_Socket/CR_Core).

reason for that. /Magnus On 2013-02-07 16:42, Aaron Knister wrote: That's awesome! (How) does it handle the case of nodes in multiple partitions? Sent from my iPhone On Feb 7, 2013, at 8:24 AM, Magnus Jonsson mag...@hpc2n.umu.se wrote: Hi everybody! Here attached is a patch that enables

[slurm-dev] task_affinity bug in 2.5.1 and after..

, Magnus -- Magnus Jonsson, Developer, HPC2N, Umeå Universitet smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature

[slurm-dev] Re: Bugs in CR_ALLOCATE_FULL_SOCKET.

Err... Wrong... On 2013-01-18 13:59, Magnus Jonsson wrote: Hi! I'm experimenting with CR_ALLOCATE_FULL_SOCKET and found some weird behaviour. Currently running git/master but have seen the same behaviour on 2.4.3 with the #define. My slurm.conf: SelectType=select/cons_res

[slurm-dev] Re: Bugs in CR_ALLOCATE_FULL_SOCKET.

This patch fixes the behaviour with allocating 2 cores instead of one with --ntasks-per-socket=1. /Magnus On 2013-01-18 13:59, Magnus Jonsson wrote: Hi! I'm experimenting with CR_ALLOCATE_FULL_SOCKET and found some weird behaviour. Currently running git/master but have seen the same

[slurm-dev] Re: Bugs in CR_ALLOCATE_FULL_SOCKET.

I have CR_ALLOCATE_FULL_SOCKET working correctly on block allocation. Will fix cyclic after the weekend and supply a patch.. Best regards, Magnus On 2013-01-18 16:00, Magnus Jonsson wrote: This patch fixes the behaviour with allocating 2 cores instead of one with --ntasks-per-socket=1