Re: [Condor-users] pool drainoff

[Dan Bradley <dan@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Steven Timm wrote:
> > > The other two features I've wanted for a long time are (1) an instruction
> > > to tell a schedd to start all its existing jobs but not
> > > accept any more new ones.  Also (2) an instruction to let existing
> > > jobs on a schedd complete but not start any more new ones.  (yes
> > > I know the latter could be accomplished with condor_hold -constraint ...)
> > >
> > >       
> > In Condor 7.1.1, condor_off -peaceful -schedd will cause the schedd to
> > stop starting new jobs and shut down after all currently running jobs
> > finish.
> >     
>
> A good start.  Now is there a way to coordinate the -peaceful
> of the startd with the -peaceful of the schedd?
>   

In 7.1.1, if you send a -peaceful shutdown to both startds and schedds, 
all existing running jobs should finish and then the schedds and startds 
should shut down, so I think there is no problem there.  The lack of 
coordination is with the collector.  If you send a -peaceful shutdown to 
everything (including the collector), then the collector will exit 
immediately, before the startds and schedds have finished.  The lack of 
a collector _might_ not interfere with the wrapping up and shutting down 
of the rest of the pool, but I'm not 100% sure, and lacking a collector 
sure won't make it easy to see what is going on.

>   
> > I believe the answer to your request (1) above is to set
> > |MAX_JOBS_SUBMITTED=0.  Or at least so says my new (not yet publicly
> > announced) How-to:|
> > http://nmi.cs.wisc.edu/node/1466
> >     
>
> We'll try this whenever we get around to testing condor 7.1.
>   

FYI: MAX_JOBS_SUBMITTED has been lurking in obscurity for a long time.  
It should work in whatever version of Condor you are using.  The general 
statement in the How-to that the advice is known to work in Condor 7.0 
is just the standard thing I put in all the new How-to docs because I 
was in too much of a hurry to investigate how far back each feature goes.

--Dan