Just a note, if srun isn't used to launch a task the odds of accounting
for the step being correct are very low. Using srun is the only "known"
way to always guarantee accounting for steps to be accurate. This also
goes for handling memory limits.
Danny
On 08/07/13 00:43, Christopher Samuel wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On 07/08/13 16:59, Janne Blomqvist wrote:
That is, the memory accounting is per task, and when launching
using mpirun the number of tasks does not correspond to the number
of MPI processes, but rather to the number of "orted" processes (1
per node).
That appears to be correct, I am seeing 1 task in the batch and 68
tasks for orted when I use mpirun whilst I see 1 task in the batch and
1104 tasks as namd2 when I use srun.
I could understand how that might result in Slurm (wrongly) thinking
that a single task is using more than its allowed memory per tasks,
but I'm not sure I understand how that could lead to Slurm thinking
the job is using vastly more memory than it actually is though.
cheers,
Chris
- --
Christopher Samuel Senior Systems Administrator
VLSCI - Victorian Life Sciences Computation Initiative
Email: [email protected] Phone: +61 (0)3 903 55545
http://www.vlsci.org.au/ http://twitter.com/vlsci
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/
iEYEARECAAYFAlIB+lgACgkQO2KABBYQAh8uqgCdGuA03jCEdJVJE2dJGBHEJjb/
WY4An3em/48L25xq4Ui/GHijSJY2Oo6T
=Zk4G
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
