Hi, thanks for the reply! Unfortunately, that option only dictates how much time is counted toward fairshare use. I have that set at 0, which works well for what it’s meant for.
But still I can’t think of a way to exclude an account from the extra priority points by the various factors: partition, job size .. Etc. — Christopher Coffey High-Performance Computing Northern Arizona University 928-523-1167 On 2/17/15, 8:09 AM, "Mehdi Denou" <[email protected]> wrote: > >Hi, > >Parhaps setting UsageFactor to "0" for this qos could do what you're >looking for ? > >Le 13/02/2015 18:49, Christopher B Coffey a écrit : >> Hi, >> >> I have this idea of a “free” account/qos. This account is preemptable >>by >> all other qos’. This account does not have any fairshare. It’s almost >> complete. But this account still receives priority points from the >> factors like: job size, partition, … Etc. >> >> Is it possible to have an account excluded from priority points given by >> factor weights? Apologies if this should be obvious, I haven’t figured >>it >> out yet from the man pages. >> >> This free account could be default for special accounts like affiliates >> with low priority. Or maybe folks want to preserve their fairshare >>points >> for debugging, short type jobs, or ones that checkpoint that can deal >>with >> being preempted. >> >> There is also no way to subtract priority points from qos’ with sacctmgr >> from what I can tell. >> >> It looks like in a situation like this, the qos should have the >> “NoReserve” flag set too, correct? >> >> Thanks! >> >> Chris >> >> > >-- >--- >Mehdi Denou >International HPC support >+336 45 57 66 56
