Re: [Condor-devel] Per machine resource limits in 7.6/7.8

[Tim St Clair <tstclair@xxxxxxxxxx>]

We have a couple of issues in the next dev series around concurrency limits.

We should add this to the cleanup.  (per-machine) concurrency limits.

Cheers,
Tim

----- Original Message -----
> From: "Lans Carstensen" <lans.carstensen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> To: "Tim St Clair" <tstclair@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: "Dan Bradley" <dan@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, condor-devel@xxxxxxxxxxx
> Sent: Tuesday, May 1, 2012 10:52:18 PM
> Subject: Re: [Condor-devel] Per machine resource limits in 7.6/7.8
>
> Does anyone have a good answer for the opposite case?  We've hit it
> and I'm wondering if anyone has a better way.
>
> Software X is licensed per-machine but floating, and you can run
> unlimited copies of X on that machine.  Ideally I'd rank the
> unclaimed
> partitionable slot higher for X jobs if a dynamic slot is already
> running X, and then I'd also have a constraint to cap me at the
> maximum number of machines.
>
> The only solution for some of these software licensing optimization
> cases appears to be to adjust the limits up from worst case via a
> custom external observation daemon.  Anyone else dealing with that?
>
> -- Lans Carstensen
>
> On Tue, May 1, 2012 at 3:23 PM, Tim St Clair <tstclair@xxxxxxxxxx>
> wrote:
> > IMHO local resource limits solves this problem nicely, which is
> > eje's patch on master. Pssst - There's a fedora build for that ;-)
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Tim
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> >> From: "Dan Bradley" <dan@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >> To: condor-devel@xxxxxxxxxxx
> >> Sent: Tuesday, May 1, 2012 4:12:50 PM
> >> Subject: Re: [Condor-devel] Per machine resource limits in 7.6/7.8
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On 5/1/12 4:01 PM, Todd Tannenbaum wrote:
> >> > On 5/1/2012 3:52 PM, Alan De Smet wrote:
> >> >> I had an interesting chat with a Condor Week attendee who has
> >> >> some challenges that I'm not sure how to handle.  They have
> >> >> various limited resources (software licenses) , but the limits
> >> >> aren't global, they're per machine, so the concurrency limits
> >> >> aren't a good fit.  Furthermore a job might claim multiple
> >> >> identical resources at once, in much the same way a single job
> >> >> might claim multiple cores.
> >> >
> >> > Maybe something like so in the job submit file:
> >> >
> >> >   concurrency_limits = licenseX_$$(Machine),
> >> >   licenseY_$$(Machine)
> >> >
> >> > Actually, the above likely will not work because $$() is not
> >> > expanded
> >> > in the matchmaker... but if concurrency_limits is evaluated,
> >> > perhaps
> >> > you could do the above idea but via ClassAd string cat
> >> > functions.
> >> >
> >> > Todd
> >>
> >> The job's concurrency limit string is read by the matchmaker
> >> before
> >> considering any machine, so trying to refer to machine attributes
> >> in
> >> the
> >> concurrency limit string just won't work.
> >>
> >> --Dan
> >>
> >>
> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >> Custom resource limits per eje's proposal
> >> >> (https://condor-wiki.cs.wisc.edu/index.cgi/tktview?tn=2905)
> >> >> seem
> >> >> like a good fit, and he was open to the idea.  However, that's
> >> >> 7.9 territory, and they'd prefer to not use a development
> >> >> release.
> >> >>
> >> >> Is there a good solution for 7.6 or 7.8?  All I've got in
> >> >> having
> >> >> slots START expressions total up usage by other slots and
> >> >> testing
> >> >> against the limit, which seems clumsy.
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> >
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Condor-devel mailing list
> >> Condor-devel@xxxxxxxxxxx
> >> https://lists.cs.wisc.edu/mailman/listinfo/condor-devel
> >>
> > _______________________________________________
> > Condor-devel mailing list
> > Condor-devel@xxxxxxxxxxx
> > https://lists.cs.wisc.edu/mailman/listinfo/condor-devel
>