> > This commit allows to specify (statically) the number of CPU's (ncpu). > > This allows to show the cpu usage relative to 1 CPU. > > So, when 1 cpu is busy, 100% is shown. 2 cpu's busy: 200%, and so on. > > At this point, the configuration of ncpu is static. > > > > When no number is given (the backward compatible option), then > > slstatus thinks it only has 1 cpu and no scaling is done, like it > > used to be. > > Eeek,
First: I kept the legacy behavious as default, since I do understand that people may choose to display the number relative to all resources. > Could you explain the rationale of this?. yes, see below > > 100% means “all resources”, 200% means “twice all resources”, how is > this supposed to be interpreted? on my 4cpu machine, a busy job shows around 25%: This typically does not trigger anything to me. with my patch, showing usage relative to 1 cpu resource, a busy job shows around 100%: This heuristically triggers me that a job is busy. This is mostly usefull to detect problem jobs consuming more that they should. To summarize: 100% means "the resources of 1 cpu", 200% means twice the resources of 1cpu. My 4cpu machine will never go beyond 400%. > > We are not collecting per-cpu statistics, so it's misleading at best. I did show per-cpu usage in the past, but that wasn't that good after all: A busy job may show as [50% 50% 0% 0%] or [0% 10% 70% 20%] and sometimes even [100% 0% 0% 0%]. This wasn't that good after all. I don't want per-cpu statistics. Having 1 number relative to 1 cpu has been good all the time. > If it's a question of “precision” (those are approximate stats), use ‰, > not %. That's not the problem. While the measurement is precise, the context introduces enough variation that a problem job does never show exactly as 100%. > > Having 100% on this setup (of 200% max) only means actually 50%, not > 100% of supposedly one core and having another core still available. I focus to consumed resources, while you focus to free resources. Our different focus remains equally valid. Kind regards, Kurt