On Tue, Jul 5, 2011 at 9:49 AM, Danny Auble <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> I expect most people preload the tables because they are using >> accounting for levee against a 'gold' system, whereas all of our users >> are basically the same and we only want the fair-share scheduling part >> not the 'gold' tracking part > > I am not sure if your assessment is correct or not. In your case where > every user is on a flat tree I could see how this would be a nice feature > though. You would have to live with fat finger issues though, but if you > didn't care which account people ran in then perhaps that isn't a big deal. > > Currently there are no plans to add this, but we can put in on our wishlist > of things to do.
I worked around it currently by searching the database every so often for the unassociated user accounts, when found we insert the user into the db with sacct I noticed the jobs still run even with the lower priority behind everyone else, so there's no real detriment. I'd be interested to find out how people are handling fair-share with slurm elsewhere.
