Re: [Condor-users] Re: split processors among multiple jobs

[Matt Hope <matthew.hope@xxxxxxxxx>]

On Mon, 21 Mar 2005 17:16:41 -0600, Derek Wright <wright@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Mon, 21 Mar 2005 11:34:33 +0000  Matt Hope wrote:
> 
> > Note that pushing a new job to the top of the queue may trigger a
> > preemption of an existing job which might not be optimal, I would
> > suggest any accelerator script should find out the lowest priority of
> > the currently running jobs and never exceed that...
> 
> not true for user-defined job priorities (what we're talking about in
> this thread).  the schedd will never preempt a job because of these
> priority values, so you don't have to worry about that.  user
> priorities (the fair-share stuff enforced by the negotiator, which you
> can view/manage via condor_userprio) can cause preemption (if the
> PREEMPTION_REQUIREMENTS expression evaluates to true), but job
> priorities never do.

Does this apply if the jobs are, in essence, running only via the
ranking by the execute machines... So if the schedd puts another job
to the top of its list which is ranked lower by the execute machines
this will not cause the currently running job previously at the top
(which presumably had at least as good a machine rank) to be
preempted.

I have behaviour like the above I assumed what was happening was down
to this mismatch (which did exist on their schedd) and educated the
user on making sure their TIER levels matched their user supplied
priority but if I was wrong I probably need to find out why the
preemption occurred.

Matt