Re: [HTCondor-devel] cpu affinity and partitionable slots

[Tim St Clair <tstclair@xxxxxxxxxx>]

of note: current cpu_shares (which only exists on master) uses SlotWeight, where I think it should really be TotalSlotCpus.

Open Questions:
Does anyone have a good way of *really* testing cpu_shares? 
What does over-subscription and fractions actually mean, or do we want to stick with whole numbers?  
++How does this^ affect performance?  

Cheers,
Tim

----- Original Message -----
> From: "Greg Thain" <gthain@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> To: htcondor-devel@xxxxxxxxxxx
> Sent: Monday, November 12, 2012 9:01:18 AM
> Subject: Re: [HTCondor-devel] cpu affinity and partitionable slots
> 
> On 11/09/2012 04:49 PM, Dan Bradley wrote:
> > Hi all
> >
> > I was thinking about the lack of support in Condor for setting cpu
> > affinity with partitionable slots in a useful way.  We do this on
> > our
> > non-partitionable slots to avoid the inevitable accidents where
> > jobs
> > try to use the whole machine from a single-core slot.  We'd like to
> > be
> > able to do it on the partitionable slots.
> >
> > My first question is whether cpu shares in cgroups make the above
> > use-case of cpu affinity obsolete.
> 
> Dan:
> 
> We certainly want to have a solution for cpu-limiting in a
> partitionable
> slot world.  One question is whether all of your clusters are ready
> for
> cgroups?  I was surprised to learn this week that LIGO has worked
> around
> all of their Debian-related cgroup problems.
> 
> All things being equal, I would prefer to do this with cgroups, as I
> don't like having to lock a job to a particular physical CPU.
> 
> -greg
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> HTCondor-devel mailing list
> HTCondor-devel@xxxxxxxxxxx
> https://lists.cs.wisc.edu/mailman/listinfo/htcondor-devel
>