[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [condor-users] preemption_requirements, once again
- Date: Fri, 30 Apr 2004 16:16:48 -0500
- From: Dan Bradley <dan@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: [condor-users] preemption_requirements, once again
Paulo Amado Mendes wrote:
Despite some help provided by list members, I still don't understand
the behaviour of
the PREEMPTION_REQUIREMENTS expression in our pool since we have upgraded
to version 6.6.2 and, some days ago, to 6.6.4.
We are using the following expression to avoid the pool being used
only by long
PREEMPTION_REQUIREMENTS = $(ActivationTimer) < (5 * $(MINUTE)) \
&& RemoteUserPrio > SubmittorPrio * 1.5
How would this prevent your pool from being used by only long running
jobs? It looks to me like once a job is more than 5 minutes old, this
expression prevents it from being preempted.
It seems also that if a set of machines is claimed by a user with many
even if a subprocess finishes, that set of machines will only be
avalible for the same user.
What you are seeing is the fact that there is no renegotiation of
resources when a job happens to end. A users claim to a machine lasts
for as long as the schedd holds onto the claim (i.e. as long as there
are more jobs to run) or until the claim gets preempted.
If you have preemption working, then this shouldn't be a problem for
you. If you don't have preemption working, or you don't want it to be
working, then there are a few workarounds. A feature being added to
6.7.X will allow you to simply prevent preemption of jobs while still
having preemption of claims (i.e. preemption on job boundaries).
Condor Support Information:
To Unsubscribe, send mail to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxx with
unsubscribe condor-users <your_email_address>