> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-slurm-...@lists.llnl.gov [mailto:owner-slurm-
> d...@lists.llnl.gov] On Behalf Of Andreas Davour
> Sent: Thursday, January 26, 2012 6:56 AM
> To: slurm-dev@lists.llnl.gov
> Subject: Re: [slurm-dev] Some questions on configuring fairshare
[...]
> Ok. I think that was more clean that before.
>
> But, this is where I get confused.
Account User Raw Shares Norm Shares Raw Usage Norm Usage
Effectv Usage FairShare
-------------------- ---------- ---------- ----------- ----------- -----------
------------- ----------
> atlas 1 0.066667 148071114 0.618961
> 0.618961 0.001604
> atlas atlm-000 5000 0.000515 9047 0.000038
> 0.004821 0.001525
>
> klasm 10 0.666667 87219380 0.364591
> 0.364591 0.684496
> klasm swegrid 5 0.666667 87219380 0.364591
> 0.364591 0.684496
>
> Then they both run jobs for a while and it looks like this:
>
> atlas 1 0.066667 148164849 0.619054
> 0.619054 0.001602
> atlas atlm-000 5000 0.000515 9047 0.000038
> 0.004822 0.001523
>
> klasm 10 0.666667 87285127 0.364339
> 0.364339 0.684675
> klasm swegrid 5 0.666667 87285127 0.364339
> 0.364339 0.684675
>
> The FairShare column decrease as atlm-000 runs, meaning he will get
> lesser chance to run, since he is using up his shares, right?
Yes.
> So, why is the FairShare column increasing for the user swegrid in the
> klasm account as he is chewing up his shares?
Even though swegrid usage increased, its bank account (klasm) has 10x as many
shares as atlas. So, proportion wise, swegrid consumed less than their share,
and so their FairShare factor went up.
> /andreas
> --
> Systems Engineer
> PDC Center for High Performance Computing
> CSC School of Computer Science and Communication
> KTH Royal Institute of Technology
> SE-100 44 Stockholm, Sweden
> Phone: 087906658
> "A satellite, an earring, and a dust bunny are what made America
> great!"
