On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 2:43 PM, Jesse Becker <[email protected]>wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 04:27:49PM -0500, Allan Tran wrote: > >> Hello, >> I'm running SGE 8.1.2 from https://arc.liv.ac.uk/trac/SGE**. Things are >> running fine by default. Now I need to set up a share policy but not sure >> how to approach this the best possible. >> The scenario is we have different groups of users and I need to give each >> of them a defined resource (or slots) so at any given time, each group will >> has a guaranty of slots. >> Say I have 120 slots (10 x 12 core procs) and 5 groups; math 20% (or 2 >> nodes), chem 50% (5), cs 10%, bio 10% (1) and other 10% (1). >> 1. If the cluster is idle, any user in any group can get whatever they >> ask for. >> 2. If the cluster is busy with all math users running (120 slots) and >> then chem user needs 50 slots, then 50 slots of math jobs will be suspended >> to allow chem users to run. Then if any other group needs to run, more math >> jobs will be suspended but math will guaranty to have at least 20 slots. >> Does it makes sense? >> >> I was thinking to enable the functional share policy and actually set it >> up, following this instructions (http://docs.oracle.com/cd/** >> E19080-01/n1.grid.eng6/817-**5677/i999885/index.html<http://docs.oracle.com/cd/E19080-01/n1.grid.eng6/817-5677/i999885/index.html> >> ) >> However I'm not quite clear how the number of functional tickets >> translates to SGE slots. Will job will be suspended or resumed by default >> with this setup? Or does it even do what I'm after here. >> Thank for your response and advice. >> > > Functional shares (alone), won't suspend any jobs. It is used for > scheduling jobs, to try and balanace job distribution as best it can > according to the ticket policy you've set. > > With 120 total slots in a single queue, and assuming sufficient jobs from > each "group," SGE will try to allocate 24 SLOTS to math, 60 SLOTS to chem, > 12 to CS, 12 to Bio, and 12 to "other." Note that I said "slots" and, > not "nodes." Unless there's a good reason to not "mix" jobs from > different groups on the same node, don't try to segregate things. > So the number of tickets (10000) doesn't necessarily means much? I could use 100 and give out 50, 20, 10, 10 and 10 to each group accordingly and they still get above number of slots? Yes, I have one queue and I like the idea of slots...to make life simple. Any group can get their allocated slots on wherever nodes available at any time. They might get 12 slots on 2 or 3 different nodes. > Functional shares also won't inherently suspend any jobs; it deals with > scheduling and dispatch. You can suspend jobs via other means though, > including load threshold and subordinate queues. > Thanks, I will read more on this. At this point just want to get the share policy working > Incidentally, the "share tree" works basically the same way as > functional shares, except that it takes past usage into account. > Functional shares *only* look at current state of the queues *right > now*. This may, or may not be appropriate for your circumstance. > I don't think the groups would care about past usage. They just want to get their share at any given time. But from what you pointed out that jobs won't be suspended...so when a unused proportions from one group get used by another group, will the jobs from group with fewer resources than given be next in line to run? > You might want to look into "resource quotas" as well, to keep a given > group from taking over the cluster. > This may be a great idea. Thank you! > > > -- > Jesse Becker > NHGRI Linux support (Digicon Contractor) >
_______________________________________________ users mailing list [email protected] https://gridengine.org/mailman/listinfo/users
