I just submitted bug 1586 about this. The slurmctld log does say it is
immediately returned to service after running scontrol reboot_nodes for
us as well.


On Tue, Apr 07, 2015 at 10:45:39AM -0700, Trey Dockendorf wrote:
> I've also had similar issues with reboot_nodes.  In my case the nodes will
> return to service before the system has a chance to reboot and is then
> marked offline with unexpected reboot rather than Maint.  I'm on 14.03.10.
> I went so far as to create a bash script that I set as RebootProgram that
> first killed slurmd then rebooted, but the node still returned to service
> before the reboot.
> 
> - Trey
> 
> =============================
> 
> Trey Dockendorf
> Systems Analyst I
> Texas A&M University
> Academy for Advanced Telecommunications and Learning Technologies
> Phone: (979)458-2396
> Email: [email protected]
> Jabber: [email protected]
> 
> On Tue, Apr 7, 2015 at 12:26 PM, Andy Wettstein <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> 
> >
> > Ah, this might be a slightly different issue. I see the problem when
> > issuing "scontrol reboot_nodes" I changed ResumeTimeout to 600, but that
> > didn't make a difference for that.
> >
> > On Mon, Apr 06, 2015 at 02:53:05PM -0700, Moe Jette wrote:
> > >
> > > This was addressed several days ago. Configure ResumeTimeout to an
> > > appropriate value
> > >
> > >
> > > Quoting Andy Wettstein <[email protected]>:
> > >
> > > >I've noticed this problem as well. This was working as expected at some
> > > >point in time (maybe still on 2.6). I haven't gotten around to filing a
> > > >bug report, but maybe I'll do that this week.
> > > >
> > > >On Mon, Mar 30, 2015 at 10:17:09AM -0700, Scott Yockel wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >>Just adding the /var/log/message to this:
> > > >>
> > > >>slurmd[4526]: error: _step_connect: connect() failed dir
> > > >>/var/slurmd/spool/slurmd node holy2a14107 job 36557200 step -2
> > > >>Connection refused
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>> On Mar 30, 2015, at 1:02 PM, Paul Edmon <[email protected]>
> > wrote:
> > > >>>
> > > >>>
> > > >>> So point of information.  My impression is that when you use
> > > >>this flag, the node/s are rebooted (or the script defined is run)
> > > >>and then the job runs as per normal.  Is this correct?  Because I
> > > >>think in our case it is rebooting the nodes but then the node is
> > > >>defined as closed due to unexpected reboot.  Is there a way to
> > > >>suppress this when the node is rebooted by this flag?  Obviously
> > > >>the reboot wasn't unexpected as slurm was aware of it due to the
> > > >>flag.
> > > >>>
> > > >>> -Paul Edmon-
> > > >
> > > >--
> > > >andy wettstein
> > > >hpc system administrator
> > > >research computing center
> > > >university of chicago
> > > >773.702.1104
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Morris "Moe" Jette
> > > CTO, SchedMD LLC
> > > Commercial Slurm Development and Support
> >
> > --
> > andy wettstein
> > hpc system administrator
> > research computing center
> > university of chicago
> > 773.702.1104
> >

-- 
andy wettstein
hpc system administrator
research computing center
university of chicago
773.702.1104

Reply via email to