[slurm-dev] RE: EXTERNAL: Re: question on multifactor priority plugin - fairshare basics

2014-10-16 Thread Ryan Cox

Ed,

Your math looks correct.  In 14.11 you can achieve what you want by 
setting Fairshare=parent on your dev account with sacctmgr. 
Fairshare=parent on accounts (only defined on users prior to 14.11) 
makes it so that accounts effectively disappear for fairshare 
calculations but still exist for limits and organizational purposes.  
Children are effectively reparented to their account's parent (root in 
your case) for fairshare.


Ryan


On 10/14/2014 08:06 PM, Blosch, Edwin L wrote:


Thanks for the reply Ryan,

Yes, I’m using the basic fairshare.  I am trying to use fairshare 
across a flat listing of users only, with a placeholder parent account 
called ‘dev’, but for now, it has no siblings.  All users are under 
‘dev’.


I think the way it is calculated, in my configuration, the largest 
fairshare I will ever see is 0.5.


F = 2**(-Ue/S),   where in my case S = 1000 / 16000  (1000 per user, 
16 users (who each have 1000))


and I have Ue =S  for a user who never submit a job yetbecause Ue 
= 0 (Uactual) + (1.0  – 0.0)*1000/16000   (1.0 is parent usage, which 
is always 1.0 in my case because dev is the only parent account for 
any user)


I was expecting/hoping/wishing the values would be between 0.0 and 
1.0, but I can work with 0.5 as the max value.  It just means that I 
need to double the PriorityWeightFairshare factor in order to achieve 
the intended relative weighting between Fairshare, QOS, Partitions, 
JobSize, Age.


Ed

*From:*Ryan Cox [mailto:ryan_...@byu.edu]
*Sent:* Tuesday, October 14, 2014 6:00 PM
*To:* slurm-dev
*Subject:* EXTERNAL: [slurm-dev] Re: question on multifactor priority 
plugin - fairshare basics


I assume you are using the default fairshare algorithm since you 
didn't specify otherwise.  F=2**(-U/S) where U is Effectv Usage (often 
displayed in documentation as UE) and S is Norm Shares.  See 
http://slurm.schedmd.com/priority_multifactor.html under the heading 
The SLURM Fair-Share Formula.


Basically, Effectv Usage needs to be less than Norm Shares for 
Fairshare to be greater than 0.5.


Ryan

On 10/14/2014 04:27 PM, Blosch, Edwin L wrote:

I must be misunderstanding a basic concept here.

What conditions would have to exist to cause a Fairshare value
greater than 0.5?

[bloscel@maruhpc5 ~]$ sshare -a

 Account User Raw Shares Norm Shares   Raw Usage
Effectv Usage FairShare

 -- -- --- ---
- --

root 1.0011376527  1.00   0.50

 root root  00.00   0  0.00 0.00

 cfd 11.0011376527  1.00   0.50

  cfd bendeee   10000.076923   0  0.076923
0.50

  cfd bloscel   10000.076923  712296  0.134718
0.297027

more users under same group




--
Ryan Cox
Operations Director
Fulton Supercomputing Lab
Brigham Young University



[slurm-dev] RE: EXTERNAL: Re: question on multifactor priority plugin - fairshare basics

2014-10-14 Thread Blosch, Edwin L
Thanks for the reply Ryan,

Yes, I’m using the basic fairshare.  I am trying to use fairshare across a flat 
listing of users only, with a placeholder parent account called ‘dev’, but for 
now, it has no siblings.  All users are under ‘dev’.

I think the way it is calculated, in my configuration, the largest fairshare I 
will ever see is 0.5.

F = 2**(-Ue/S),   where in my case S = 1000 / 16000  (1000 per user, 16 users 
(who each have 1000))
and I have Ue =S  for a user who never submit a job yetbecause Ue = 0 
(Uactual) + (1.0  – 0.0)*1000/16000   (1.0 is parent usage, which is always 1.0 
in my case because dev is the only parent account for any user)

I was expecting/hoping/wishing the values would be between 0.0 and 1.0, but I 
can work with 0.5 as the max value.  It just means that I need to double the 
PriorityWeightFairshare factor in order to achieve the intended relative 
weighting between Fairshare, QOS, Partitions, JobSize, Age.

Ed


From: Ryan Cox [mailto:ryan_...@byu.edu]
Sent: Tuesday, October 14, 2014 6:00 PM
To: slurm-dev
Subject: EXTERNAL: [slurm-dev] Re: question on multifactor priority plugin - 
fairshare basics

I assume you are using the default fairshare algorithm since you didn't specify 
otherwise.  F=2**(-U/S) where U is Effectv Usage (often displayed in 
documentation as UE) and S is Norm Shares.  See 
http://slurm.schedmd.com/priority_multifactor.html under the heading The SLURM 
Fair-Share Formula.

Basically, Effectv Usage needs to be less than Norm Shares for Fairshare to be 
greater than 0.5.

Ryan
On 10/14/2014 04:27 PM, Blosch, Edwin L wrote:
I must be misunderstanding a basic concept here.

What conditions would have to exist to cause a Fairshare value greater than 0.5?


[bloscel@maruhpc5 ~]$ sshare -a
 Account   User Raw Shares Norm Shares   Raw Usage Effectv 
Usage  FairShare
 -- -- --- --- 
- --
root  1.0011376527  
1.00   0.50
 root  root  00.00   0  
0.00   0.00
 cfd 11.0011376527  
1.00   0.50
  cfd   bendeee   10000.076923   0  
0.076923   0.50
  cfd   bloscel   10000.076923  712296  
0.134718   0.297027
more users under same group