Re: [HTCondor-users] condor_userprio's WeightedAccumulatedUsage

[Jon Bernard <jonbernard@xxxxxxxxx>]

Hi Todd,

SLOT_WEIGHT = Cpus, but the number of cores per slot is only 1.

Jon

On Thu, Apr 6, 2017 at 3:05 PM, Todd Tannenbaum <tannenba@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On 4/6/2017 1:45 PM, Jon Bernard wrote:

Hi all,

I'm seeing some strange numbers for WeightedAccumulatedUsage from one of
our pools.

Our test case is to submit 1000 jobs which sleep 30 seconds. The total
remotewallclocktime for all the jobs is 30,219 seconds. However, the
usage for the user reported by condor_userprio for these jobs is on the
order of 600,000 seconds.

For jobs which sleep 0 seconds, condor_userprio reports usage of 300,000
to 600,000 seconds, as compared to about 200 seconds of walltime.

The test script is essentially

condor_userprio -resetusage <user>
condor_submit sleep30
clusterid=$(condor_q -af clusterid | head -n1)
condor_wait -num 1000 /tmp/$clusterid.log
condor_history -af remotewallclocktime -limit 1000 | awksum
condor_userprio -allusers -const 'name == <user>' -af
WeightedAccumulatedUsage

Is there a configuration macro which might be affecting this?

Thanks,
Jon

Hi Jon,

What is the value of config knob SLOT_WEIGHTÂ ?

By default, SLOT_WEIGHT = Cpus

IIRC, the "Weighted" prefix in WeightedAccumulatedUsage means it takes the SLOT_WEIGHT into account. ÂSo if you are using the default SLOT_WEIGHT = Cpus, then I would expect to see the results you got above if your sleep jobs ran on a lot of 20 core slots, i.e. slots where Cpus=20. (since 600k seconds / 20 = 30k)

Hope the above helps
Todd

_______________________________________________
HTCondor-users mailing list
To unsubscribe, send a message to htcondor-users-request@xxxxxxx.edu 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/