re hi,
your script will occasionally fail because the number of fields in the
output of "uptime" is variable.
I was reminded by this one:
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/11735211/get-last-five-minutes-load-average-using-ksh-with-uptime
Even more a reason to use /proc...
Regards,
Benjamin
Am 21.03.2017 um 21:15 schrieb kesim:
> There is an error in the script. It could be:
>
> scontrol update node=your_node_name WEIGHT=`echo 100*$(uptime | awk
> '{print $12}')/1 | bc`
>
>
> On Tue, Mar 21, 2017 at 8:41 PM, kesim <ketiw...@gmail.com
> <mailto:ketiw...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> Dear SLURM Users,
>
> My response here is for those who are trying to solve the simple
> problem of nodes ordering according to the CPU load. Actually,
> Markus was right and he gave me the idea (THANKS!!!)
> The solution is not pretty but it works and it has a lot of
> flexibility. Just put into crone a script:
>
> #!/bin/sh
> scontrol update node=your_node_name WEIGHT=`echo 100*$(uptime | awk
> -F'[, ]' '{print $21}')/1 | bc`
>
> Best Regards,
>
> Ketiw
>
>
>
>
> On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 3:31 PM, Markus Koeberl
> <markus.koeb...@tugraz.at <mailto:markus.koeb...@tugraz.at>> wrote:
>
>
> On Monday 20 March 2017 05:38:29 Christopher Samuel wrote:
> >
> > On 19/03/17 23:25, kesim wrote:
> >
> > > I have 11 nodes and declared 7 CPUs per node. My setup is
> such that all
> > > desktop belongs to group members who are using them mainly
> as graphics
> > > stations. Therefore from time to time an application is
> requesting high
> > > CPU usage.
> >
> > In this case I would suggest you carve off 3 cores via cgroups for
> > interactive users and give Slurm the other 7 to parcel out to
> jobs by
> > ensuring that Slurm starts within a cgroup dedicated to those
> 7 cores..
> >
> > This is similar to the "boot CPU set" concept that SGI came up
> with (at
> > least I've not come across people doing that before them).
> >
> > To be fair this is not really Slurm's problem to solve, Linux
> gives you
> > the tools to do this already, it's just that people don't
> realise that
> > you can use cgroups to do this.
> >
> > Your use case is valid, but it isn't really HPC, and you can't
> really
> > blame Slurm for not catering to this. It can use cgroups to
> partition
> > cores to jobs precisely so it doesn't need to care what the
> load average
> > is - it knows the kernel is ensuring the cores the jobs want
> are not
> > being stomped on by other tasks.
>
> You could additionally define a higher "Weight" value for a host
> if you know that the load is usually higher on it than on the
> others.
>
>
> regards
> Markus Köberl
> --
> Markus Koeberl
> Graz University of Technology
> Signal Processing and Speech Communication Laboratory
> E-mail: markus.koeb...@tugraz.at <mailto:markus.koeb...@tugraz.at>
>
>
>
--
FSU Jena | JULIELab.de/Staff/Benjamin+Redling.html
vox: +49 3641 9 44323 | fax: +49 3641 9 44321
