Mailing List Archives

Public Access

 		[Computer Systems Lab]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

RE: [Condor-users] counting licenses

At 03:16 AM 5/4/2005, Andrea Olgiati wrote: 
Solving such a problem (ie runtime determination of the availability of
a given resource) would be very interesting for me too. In my case, the
resources are software licences controlled by a flexlm daemon. Both
condor jobs and other (non-condor) users need to be able to access and
share such resources.

The challenge with flexlm is that Condor can not guarantee that a license that is available NOW, will be there when the job scheduled by Condor will ask for it. How does your job react when it fails to get a license?

So far we've been using busy-waiting, but this is a less-than-perfect
solution, as it's quite wasteful.


I agree!


Would something like shell "backtick" command be implementable in the
scheduler? Main problem I see is that, between the moment the scheduler
checks for the availability of a resource and the actual resource being
claimed, someone else could come in and 'steal' it. Am I right?

Yes, this is one of the main problems as you will expect Condor to restart your job if it fails because it could not get a license.

Miron



Thanks,
Andrea

--
Andrea Olgiati - Elixent - Castlemead, Lwr Castle St., Bristol BS1 3AG,
UK
andrea.olgiati@xxxxxxxxxxx                             ++44 (0)117
9175612




> -----Original Message-----
> From: condor-users-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:condor-users-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Joshua Kolden
> Sent: 04 May 2005 03:28
> To: Condor-Users Mail List
> Subject: Re: [Condor-users] counting licenses
>
> Thanks, but the problem here is that other jobs not
> restricted by licenses may have control of these machines
> when a maya (to use your
> example) job is submitted.  In theory the maya job is free to
> run on another cpu in the queue because licenses are
> available, however it does not run.  This is the problem we
> are running into now, along with more complex examples with
> multiple licensed software packages interacting.
>
> I need to have a dynamic expression in which I can tick off
> licenses use independently of the cpu I'm running on.  Are
> dynamic expressions like this even possible?
>
> Thanks,
> j
>
> John Wheez wrote:
>
> > well this is what you can do. in each machines local config you can
> > create a class add and which determines what software that
> machine can
> > acept. thats how we built our condor system. so if you only have 5
> > licenses only designate five machines to acept those types
> of jobs...
> >
> > for example if you have 10 maya licenses in 10 local
> configs you would
> > make class adds saying that the machine could render maya...
> > also if oyu only have 3 shake licenses then you put in the local
> > config of three machines the ability to accept shake jobs..etcc..
> >
> >
> > Joshua Kolden wrote:
> >
> >> We are scaling up, but at the moment we have 5 people/systems
> >> submitting jobs, we have see 20 jobs on the queue at once.
>  We have
> >> multiple frames of rendering so for each "job" there are actually
> >> 100-500 individual tasks to run.  We have 20 cpus to run
> on, plus a
> >> few workstations.  We only have 2 licenses (4 under special
> >> conditions) of rendering software by 20 licenses of compositing
> >> software, we may upgrade the 2 licensees of rendering to
> more if we
> >> can get this all working efficiently.
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >> j
> >>
> >> Miron Livny wrote:
> >>
> >>> Joshua,
> >>>
> >>> Doing licenses "right" is a challenge. It also depends on your
> >>> workload and how you are submitting jobs to the pool. How
> many jobs
> >>> that request the license do you typically have and how many
> >>> submission points (SchedDs) are you using?
> >>>
> >>> Miron
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> At 01:30 PM 5/3/2005, you wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> So I sent this out before, but didn't get any takers.
> It's really
> >>>> important for us and seems like a solved problem so if
> you know and
> >>>> answer or have an idea don't be afraid to speak up.
> >>>>
> >>>> I have 10 machines, each with 2 cpus that can run our licensed
> >>>> software for which we currently have 2 licenses.  The
> two licenses
> >>>> are limited by machine, not by process, so if one license is
> >>>> consumed by one machine it can run the software also on
> the second
> >>>> cpu without consuming another license.  In this way two machines
> >>>> can run 4 processes with two licenses.
> >>>>
> >>>> Any ideas on a classAd expression that would cover software
> >>>> licensing in this way, so that we can run on any of the machines
> >>>> that are capable of running the software.  Even a general way to
> >>>> count licenses per process would be helpful.
> >>>>
> >>>> Thanks,
> >>>> j
> >>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>> Condor-users mailing list
> >>>> Condor-users@xxxxxxxxxxx
> >>>> https://lists.cs.wisc.edu/mailman/listinfo/condor-users
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> Condor-users mailing list
> >>> Condor-users@xxxxxxxxxxx
> >>> https://lists.cs.wisc.edu/mailman/listinfo/condor-users
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Condor-users mailing list
> >> Condor-users@xxxxxxxxxxx
> >> https://lists.cs.wisc.edu/mailman/listinfo/condor-users
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Condor-users mailing list
> > Condor-users@xxxxxxxxxxx
> > https://lists.cs.wisc.edu/mailman/listinfo/condor-users
> >
> >
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> Condor-users mailing list
> Condor-users@xxxxxxxxxxx
> https://lists.cs.wisc.edu/mailman/listinfo/condor-users
>
>


_______________________________________________
Condor-users mailing list
Condor-users@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.cs.wisc.edu/mailman/listinfo/condor-users