Re: [Condor-users] job eviction and image size

[Dan Bradley <dan@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

matthew hope wrote:

> The problem is not normally that the job is evicted due to its image
> size* but that it goes beyound the limit for the machine and then is
> preempted for another reason.
>
> At this point the imagesize has been updated to report the real usage
> but when compared against the startd's reported memory it is not
> compatible.
>
> Normally this is not an issue if the startd is correctly reporting the
> right amount of memory but there is a bug which causes it to report
> too little for SMP machines in windows at least. I believe this is
> fixed in the dev release but can't remember if it in the 6.6 series.
>
> The only easy way to work round this is:
>
> 1) lie in the startd (artificially report more memory than exists)
> 2) lie in the job ClassAd
> (when a job cannot run condor_qedit it's ImageSize to be low again.)

Yet another way is to explicitly specify your own memory requirements in 
your submit file.  This prevents the auto-generated ImageSize 
requirements, so you don't have to worry about changes in ImageSize 
causing rescheduling problems if the job is preempted.  Example:

requirements = Memory >= 249

--Dan