at least in our setup we use (hierarchical group quotas) the quota of the group you are submitting is limiting the overall availability of slots. Inside the group the priority based on previous usage (fairshare) will takeover and decide which users jobs to prefere - does this make any snese for you ?
Hi,
See the subject - Iâm looking into setting up scheduling here in line with group power allocations, and itâs unclear to me what the interactions are between user priorities and group priorities / quotas; they both could be used to to what I want, I think â it depends on what the interactions are between the two. The documentation is clear on the quotas and on the user priorities, what is not clear is the interaction between the two. The best I could find is this passage
After the condor_negotiator calculates the quota assigned to each group, possibly adding in surplus, it then negotiates with the condor_schedd daemons in the system to try to match jobs to each group. It does this one group at a time. By default, it goes in âstarvation group order.â That is, the group whose current usage is the smallest fraction of its quota goes first, then the next, and so on.
It sounds like the quota here take precedence over priority settings, but itâs not explicit.
All pointers to the relevant documentation appreciated.
JT
_______________________________________________
HTCondor-users mailing list
To unsubscribe, send a message to htcondor-users-request@xxxxxxxxxxx with a
subject: Unsubscribe
The archives can be found at: https://www-auth.cs.wisc.edu/lists/htcondor-users/
![[Computer Systems Lab]](http://www.cs.wisc.edu/pics/csl_logo.gif){kind=logo}