You are right. Many thanks for correcting. On Tuesday, March 21, 2017, Benjamin Redling <benjamin.ra...@uni-jena.de> wrote:
> > 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 $12}')/1 | bc` > > > > > > On Tue, Mar 21, 2017 at 8:41 PM, kesim <ketiw...@gmail.com > <javascript:;> > > <mailto:ketiw...@gmail.com <javascript:;>>> wrote: > > > > Dear SLURM Users, > > > > My response here is for those who are trying to solve the simple > > problem of nodes ordering according to the CPU load. Actually, > > Markus was right and he gave me the idea (THANKS!!!) > > The solution is not pretty but it works and it has a lot of > > flexibility. Just put into crone a script: > > > > #!/bin/sh > > scontrol update node=your_node_name WEIGHT=`echo 100*$(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 <javascript:;> <mailto: > markus.koeb...@tugraz.at <javascript:;>>> 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 <javascript:;> <mailto: > markus.koeb...@tugraz.at <javascript:;>> > > > > > > > > > -- > FSU Jena | JULIELab.de/Staff/Benjamin+Redling.html > vox: +49 3641 9 44323 | fax: +49 3641 9 44321 >
