Re: [Condor-users] When do machine RANK settings apply?

[matthew hope <matthew.hope@xxxxxxxxx>]

On Wed, 5 Jan 2005 12:10:23 -0500, Ian Chesal <ICHESAL@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Thanks for all your help! A few more questions below.

not a problem
 
> So PREEMPTION_REQUIREMENTS only comes into play when condor wants to
> preempt for user priority reasons?

Yes, I believe the updated 6.7 docs are more explict about this
 
> My experiment last night consisted of setting:
> 
> PREEMPTION_REQUIREMENTS = (CurrentTime - EnteredCurrentState) > (1 * (60
> * 60)) && MY.RANK < TARGET.RANK
> RANK = (TARGET.JobPrio * 2880)
> 
> This got close the desired behaviour but lower priority users were still
> preempting higher priority users on occasion. And users new to the
> system were getting more resources than users with long-time running
> jobs if they were all the same (highest) priority level.

Yes I gave up trying to have the negotiator reference both the
currently running job and the job it is evaluating. It just doesn't
seem to work. Using machine RANK is much easier if you don't mind
preemption (or are happy to work round it with long retirement
promises)
 
> I'm now experiments with your suggestion of:
> 
> PREEMPTION_REQUIREMENTS = False
> PRIORITY_HALFLIFE = 1
> RANK = (TARGET.JobPrio * 2880)
> 
> With our very long retirement time (enough for our jobs to finish
> normally) this should be okay. I'll let you know how it works out.

hope it all works...out of interest how many execute/submission nodes
exist in your farm and are any/all of them windows.

Since you are running 6.7 series I would be interested to know since
our windows pool was unable to handle job queues over about 100 or so
jobs before the submitters schedd's and shadows began to have serious
issues.
 
I am also interested in whether or not this system will work if you
skew the users relative priorities without disabling preemption. i.e
whether two users with identically ranked jobs will end up over time
with the correct proportion of the farm based on their user priority.
I haven't tried that yet and have no reason to till I move onto post
6.6 series

Matt