Re: [Condor-users] Group issues

[Horvátth Szabolcs <szabolcs@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Just to add to the group accounting confusion (and trying to ping this 
unanswered topic) I get strange matchmaking behaviour when using group 
quotas:
If I have two dagman jobs from the same user, one with both higher 
priority and machine rank preference the execution order of the jobs is 
strict: all higher
priority jobs run before the lower priority jobs are started.
But if I assign the jobs to a group than the execution order gets 
mingled, the two jobs get roughly equal share of processors.

Can it be a configuration issue? Is there anything I can check to get 
the same matchmaking logic as without groups, using quotas just to limit 
the processor usage of the jobs?

Using 6.9.3 by the way.

Cheers,
Szabolcs




Horvátth Szabolcs wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'm using group quota to limit job count because of the available 
> licenses we have for commercial softwares.
> While this works nicely I have two problems that I'd like to solve somehow:
>
> - If multiple users submit jobs using the same group the users' personal 
> priorities are not considered for negotiation.
> I'd like to have fair share between users within a group too. Is it 
> possible to do so?
>
> - When a job is running as "part of a group" the users' information is 
> not added to the condor_status -submitters data.
> Is there any way to get data about the actual users submitting the jobs 
> using condor_status and condor_userprio?
>
> Thanks for any pointers!
>
> Cheers,
> Szabolcs
>