Mailing List Archives
Authenticated access
|
|
|
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [HTCondor-users] Possible to have submit-implemented per-machine job limits?
- Date: Mon, 12 Sep 2016 12:52:52 -0500
- From: Brian Bockelman <bbockelm@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: [HTCondor-users] Possible to have submit-implemented per-machine job limits?
Hi Michael,
Without answering your question -
Is Docker universe an option here? Docker jobs have a virtualized network interface. This means that "port 8080", for example, would be unique per job.
Brian
> On Sep 12, 2016, at 12:31 PM, Michael V Pelletier <Michael.V.Pelletier@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Hi folks,
>
> We have a situation where a certain type of job has an adjunct service
> process which can only have on instance on a given machine, since it uses
> a static port number to provide its service to the job. It can't easily be
> reworked since it's designed to operate that way in a production
> environment. This means that one physical machine can only run one
> instance of that job.
>
> I know I can set up a machine resource in the configuration for this
> purpose, assigning one "myservice" resource to each machine, and this
> would allow the job to specify "request_myservice = 1" and thus limit to
> one job per machine.
>
> What I'm wondering is if it's possible to use something in the job's
> requirements expression alone to accomplish this, rather than a
> server-side config customization. I'm using partitionable slots - I
> suspect that fact may make this a tricky problem to solve without startd
> configuration changes, because the partitionable slot would probably need
> information about what the dynamic slots are doing.
>
> One similar thing I've done in the past was to steer jobs which could
> share a license checkout on the same machine by making a "condor_q" query
> from the script and turning it into a rank expression to favor machines
> already running that user's licensed jobs, but that requires, needless to
> say, a submit wrapper script which I'd like to avoid.
>
> I've also used SubmitterUserResourcesInUse, but that applies to the entire
> pool rather than to a single machine.
>
> Maybe there's some sort of trick in the new 8.4 submit syntax that could
> be applied here?
>
> Thanks for any suggestions you can offer!
>
> -Michael Pelletier.
> _
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> HTCondor-users mailing list
> To unsubscribe, send a message to htcondor-users-request@xxxxxxxxxxx with a
> subject: Unsubscribe
> You can also unsubscribe by visiting
> https://lists.cs.wisc.edu/mailman/listinfo/htcondor-users
>
> The archives can be found at:
> https://lists.cs.wisc.edu/archive/htcondor-users/