Mailing List Archives
Authenticated access
|
|
|
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [HTCondor-users] condor_userprio
- Date: Mon, 27 Aug 2018 06:57:16 -0500
- From: Todd Tannenbaum <tannenba@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: [HTCondor-users] condor_userprio
On 8/26/2018 8:40 AM, Alessandra wrote:
Hi,
i'm trying to adjust the fair shares and priorities in condor. One of
the things that I don't understand is why the condor_userprio tool
doesn't report the configured priorities but seems to report random numbers.
for example I have condor_userprio reporting
group_atlas.pilot = 10000
group_atlas.production = 10000
But the priorities configured are
GROUP_PRIO_FACTOR_group_atlas =Â 10.0
GROUP_PRIO_FACTOR_group_atlas.pilot =Â 10.0
GROUP_PRIO_FACTOR_group_atlas.production =Â 10.0
it really should be 10 even if I didn't explicitely declared them
because the group_atlas is 10. 10k is the default and 1000 I'm not sure
where it comes from.
Hi Alessandra,
Do the below groups have a group quota? In other words, do you have in
your config a GROUP_NAMES entry and for each group a GROUP_QUOTA_* entry ?
If so, please be aware that these hierarchical groups themselves do not
have a priority factor. The historical fair share scheduling in HTCondor
is only applied to users, not to groups, so all the parameters dealing
with historical fair share scheduling (like real user priority,
effective user priority, and priority factor) have no meaning with
respect to groups. All setting GROUP_PRIO_FACTOR_<groupname> does is
set the default priority factor for a new user that submits into that
group for the first time. I am guessing this is not what you thought it
did.
Instead of historical fair share, the group scheduling is controlled
solely by GROUP_SORT_EXPR, which defaults to "starvation group order."
That is, the group whose current usage is the smallest fraction of its
quota goes first, then the next, and so on.
I realize I did not directly answer you question(s) below, but given the
above information, I am guessing that you really didn't mean to apply a
priority factor to groups in the first place. Perhaps if you told us
your desired scheduling policy someone could better assist...
Hope the above helps,
regards,
Todd