Hi,
the cpu time should indeed add up, it looks like in your case 28
seconds are missing.
The MaxRSS is the maximum resident size of the batch step and the
whatever the batch step ran. They don't have to add up. Typically the
batch step includes the shell and the srun while the other steps the
user application and they usually have different memory profile.
On 08/11/2014 11:48 AM, Robert Stober wrote:
Hi David,
One more question with regard to the sacct output:
sacct -o jobid,ncpus,state,cputimeraw,maxrss -j 72
JobID NCPUS State CPUTimeRAW MaxRSS
------------ ---------- ---------- ---------- ----------
72 2 COMPLETED 542
72.batch 1 COMPLETED 271 6708K
72.0 1 FAILED 122 4228K
72.1 1 FAILED 121 4228K
I don't understand why the cputimeraw of the batch step doesn't equal
the sum of the two job steps, which should be 243? Is this because the
batch step cputimeraw also includes system time that was used to run the
job but not used by the job itself?
Also, how should memory be interpreted? Why is the memory consumption of
the batch step higher than either of the two job steps?
Thank you,
Robert
On 8/5/2014 1:41 PM, David Bigagli wrote:
Yes that is correct. The first entry is the allocation which has 2
cpus, -n 2 was specified, the second entry is the batch step that run
for 81 seconds, so the total cpu time used was 81 8*2.
Form 'man sacct':
CPUTime Formatted (Elapsed time * CPU) count used by a job or step.
CPUTimeRaw Unlike above non formatted (Elapsed time * CPU) count for
a job or step. Units are cpu-seconds
On 08/05/2014 11:48 AM, Robert Stober wrote:
Hi David,
That's because I forgot to include my sacct command:
sacct -ap -S 2014-01-01 -E now
--format=jobid,user,partition,ncpus,cputimeraw,nodelist
So in my example, the single job step (59.batch) ran on one core and
took 81 seconds. The first entry (which I'm referring to as the "primary
job") shows that he reserved (or requested) two cpus. I'm assuming that
since the two cpus he requested were unavailable to anyone else, Slurm
is just showing that he effectively used 162 cpu seconds (81 x 2).
Thank you,
Robert
On 8/5/2014 9:53 AM, David Bigagli wrote:
Hi Robert,
the first line is the allocation and the second the batch
step, the batch step runs on one cpu. I am not sure what are the
columns with values 162 and 81. The elapsed time of the allocation
should be the sum of elapsed time of all steps, so if the step ran for
81 seconds I would expect the elapsed time of the allocation to be 81.
For exaple:
david@prometeo ~/slurm/work>\sacct -o jobid,ncpus,state,elapsed -j
78475
JobID NCPUS State Elapsed
------------ ---------- ---------- ----------
78475 2 COMPLETED 00:00:20
78475.batch 1 COMPLETED 00:00:20
78475.0 2 COMPLETED 00:00:10
78475.1 2 COMPLETED 00:00:10
On 08/05/2014 09:19 AM, Robert Stober wrote:
Please consider this sacct output. My question is how should this
output
be understood?
59|usera|defq|2|162|
59.batch|||1|81|
Here's how I'm reading it:
1. usera submitted jobid 59 and requested 2 CPUs.
2. He actually used only one CPU for 81 seconds.
3. As a result, 2 CPUs were reserved and unavailable to anyone during
the 81 second run time, so 162 CPU seconds were effectively used (by
virtue of both CPUs being unavailable during the entire job run time).
Do I have an accurate understanding of this? If so, then it appears
that
if I want the total "chargeable" resource usage I should just look at
the primary job record (59 in this case) and skip the records for each
of the job steps since they're included in the primary. Would you
concur?
Thank you,
Robert
--
brightcomputing_logo.png
Mr. Robert Stober
Senior Systems Architect
Mob: +1 209 986 9298
Skype: rstober
robert.sto...@brightcomputing.com
<mailto:robert.sto...@brightcomputing.com>
Bright Computing, Inc.
2880 Zanker Road
Suite 203
San Jose, CA 95134
Tel: +1 408 300 9448
Fax: +1 408 715 0102
www.BrightComputing.com <http://www.brightcomputing.com>
--
brightcomputing_logo.png
Mr. Robert Stober
Senior Systems Architect
Mob: +1 209 986 9298
Skype: rstober
robert.sto...@brightcomputing.com
<mailto:robert.sto...@brightcomputing.com>
Bright Computing, Inc.
2880 Zanker Road
Suite 203
San Jose, CA 95134
Tel: +1 408 300 9448
Fax: +1 408 715 0102
www.BrightComputing.com <http://www.brightcomputing.com>
--
brightcomputing_logo.png
Mr. Robert Stober
Senior Systems Architect
Mob: +1 209 986 9298
Skype: rstober
robert.sto...@brightcomputing.com <mailto:robert.sto...@brightcomputing.com>
Bright Computing, Inc.
2880 Zanker Road
Suite 203
San Jose, CA 95134
Tel: +1 408 300 9448
Fax: +1 408 715 0102
www.BrightComputing.com <http://www.brightcomputing.com>
--
Thanks,
/David/Bigagli
Slurm User Group Meeting
September 23-24, Lugano, Switzerland
Find out more http://slurm.schedmd.com/slurm_ug_agenda.html
www.schedmd.com
