Re: [Condor-users] LoadAvg calculation/bug?

[David Kotz <dkotz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Rather than LoadAvg, I think you should use target.TotalLoadAvg.
LoadAvg refers to the load average of a single slot on a multicore
machine, and without specifying target.TotalLoadAvg, the expression
might (I'm guessing) actually look at the load average of a slot on the
submit machine.  Condor has some disambiguation built in, but I like to
specify, just in case.

- dave



On Thu, 2010-06-10 at 14:46 -0700, kgk wrote:
> Condor: 7.5.2
> Debian Linux distribution AMD64
> Nodes: 64
> 
> We have shared cluster where users may log in and start jobs manuall.
> We would prefer
> that nodes/slots with a high local  load average be avoided for condor
> jobs.
> We have added Rank = (100 - LoadAvg) to our standard submit scripts.
> However,  using condor_status I see many nodes (already being used by
> others)
> show a LoadAvg of 0.0 meaning they are scheduled with equal rank.
> 
> In some condor documents it seems that LoadAvg is determined by the
> submitted condor jobs and in others it seems to be the true machine
> load reported by the OS.
> 
> 1. Is LoadAvg supposed to be the kernel reported load average?
> 2. If so, then I believe there is a bug
> 3. If not then how should I select for machine with no or very low
> load?
> 
> Thanks,
> Kris
> _______________________________________________
> Condor-users mailing list
> To unsubscribe, send a message to condor-users-request@xxxxxxxxxxx with a
> subject: Unsubscribe
> You can also unsubscribe by visiting
> https://lists.cs.wisc.edu/mailman/listinfo/condor-users
> 
> The archives can be found at:
> https://lists.cs.wisc.edu/archive/condor-users/