[HTCondor-users] Combining Accounting groups and Priority factors

[Stephen Jones <sjones@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Hi,

I have a question I've wondered about for quite a while.

Priority factors convert the usage of some user to a priority. A low 
priority factor will turn high usage into a low "effective priority" 
(where low is better). Hence users with a low priority factor will run 
more work. I think that's right. On the other hand, accounting groups 
assign users to a group, and an allocation can be made for that group, 
using (e.g. GROUP_QUOTA_DYNAMIC_group_SOMEGRP =Â 0.65)Â I've read 
somewhere that these can be used together. And looking at my site, I can 
see they _are_ used together. That's scary. What does it all mean?

The two ideas seem to be in conflict. One controls the allocation via a 
priority factor, that works on usage over time to promote (or penalise)Â 
certain users according to their relative recent usage. The other scheme 
"reserves" slots using GROUP_QUOTA_DYNAMIC... so which scheme (if any) 
takes precedence? And if none does, how does all this play out?

(BTW: Having asked the question, I can sort of see what the answer might 
be. I expect the reservation takes priority where there are enough jobs 
to fill it, else the slots are dished out according to priority 
factors... or something like that. Is this it? Is this how it all works?)

Thanks for your help...

Cheers,

Ste


--
Steve Jones                             sjones@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Grid System Administrator               office: 220
High Energy Physics Division            tel (int): 43396
Oliver Lodge Laboratory                 tel (ext): +44 (0)151 794 3396
University of Liverpool                 http://www.liv.ac.uk/physics/hep/