Hi Eva,
I wasn't able to reproduce the problem with a quick test. You have
config lines similar to these?
NodeName=gpu-1-[4-17],gpu-2-[4,6-16],gpu-3-9 ...
PartitionName=... Nodes=gpu-1-[4-17],gpu-2-[4,6-16],gpu-3-9
Regards,
John
On 2013-07-10 19:20, Eva Hocks wrote:
>
>
>
>
> Thanks
The llnl documentation is very out of date. You should be consulting
http://slurm.schedmd.com.
It might not be that different in this case but you should probably switch in
any case.
Teddy wrote:
>Hi Daniel and Moe,
>
>Thanks for your reply.
>
>
>Some of users of ours said the srun with --dis
Hi Daniel and Moe,
Thanks for your reply.
Some of users of ours said the srun with --distribution somehow not working
as expected.
When i read the tutorial carefully (
https://computing.llnl.gov/linux/slurm/mc_support.html), i found this:
"It is important to note that many of these flags are o
Thanks, John
but this is what I have in the partition file:
nodes=gpu-1-[4-17],gpu-2-[4,6-16],gpu-3-9
slurm gets confused when it can't look up gpu-2-4 and then splits the
gpu-2-[4,6-16] into gpu-[2]-[4] (failed lookup) and 6-16] (which is
actually no node name at all but a wrong parsing af
On 07/10/2013 06:16 PM, Eva Hocks wrote:
> The entry in partiton.conf:
> PartitionName=CLUSTER Default=yes State=UP
> nodes=gpu-[1]-[4-17],gpu-[2]-[4,6-16],gpu-[3]-[9]
>
>
> causes slurmctl to crash:
>
> 2013-07-10T16:03:22.923] error: find_node_record: lookup failure for
> gpu-[2]-[4]
> [2013-0
The entry in partiton.conf:
PartitionName=CLUSTER Default=yes State=UP
nodes=gpu-[1]-[4-17],gpu-[2]-[4,6-16],gpu-[3]-[9]
causes slurmctl to crash:
2013-07-10T16:03:22.923] error: find_node_record: lookup failure for gpu-[2]-[4]
[2013-07-10T16:03:22.923] error: node_name2bitmap: invalid no
Developers at Bull have been discussing a SLURM license management project with
SchedMD. The first phase of this project would provide initial support of
licenses for accounting purposes within SLURM. This would involve the
introduction of new license tables in the accounting information. Th
We are pleased to announce the availability of Slurm version 2.6. Changes from
version 2.5 are extensive and highlights are listed below. Please see the
RELEASE_NOTES file in the Slurm distribution for more details. Note the Slurm
documentation at schedmd.com has been updated to version 2.6.
Down
On 07/09/2013 08:38 PM, Neil Van Lysel wrote:
> Is it possible to grant a user priority on X cores? For example, we have
> a small 768 core SLURM cluster, and we would like to give user A
> priority on only 512 cores. I am currently using QOS to give specific
> users priority on all cores, but I d
