Side question, when is the stable release of 2.6 projected to be available?

-Paul Edmon-

On 06/06/2013 11:40 AM, Moe Jette wrote:
> Perhaps what you want is the srun --exclusive option and running the
> srun commands in the background.
>
> Slurm v2.6 has native job array support.
>
> Quoting "Alan V. Cowles" <[email protected]>:
>
>> Hey guys,
>>
>> We are new to slurm, hoping to use some of it's advanced parallel
>> features over what is offered in older versions of SGE.
>>
>> We have written various sbatch scripts to test out methods of submitting
>> jobs, and we are not finding a way to have it perform as intended.
>>
>> We have spent many hours looking over the man pages and resubmitting
>> jobs but haven't found one that works just yet so I'm hoping another
>> user can help us out.
>>
>> Here is a simple example what we are attempting to do:
>>
>> We have an sbatch script that in turn should call out 10 consecutive
>> srun commands.
>>
>> We have it spread across 2 nodes of our cluster with -N 2, and what we
>> would like is for srun1,srun2 to run at the same time, then 3,4 once the
>> first two are finished, and so on until all 10 jobs are finished.
>>
>> What we are finding is that the first srun is running in parallel on 2
>> nodes, then it's proceeding to the next sequentially, until it finishes
>> all 10. Obviously this is not ideal.
>>
>> We have looked into the options for -n, -c, and haven't found either to
>> do what we were expecting just extrapolate out the running of each srun
>> to multiple cores/machines.
>>
>> One workaround we have found is to just submit all 10 jobs as separate
>> srun commands. This works in theory until the we try to scale up to say
>> 200 jobs, we run out of available slots, and with srun, jobs will
>> terminate without available slots to receive them, which is why we
>> really want to get this running as intended in an sbatch.
>>
>> Any help that can be provided in how to correctly modify the sbatch
>> script would be most helpful.
>>
>> Thanks in advance.
>>
>> Alan Cowles
>>

Reply via email to