[slurm-users] Re: salloc+srun vs just srun

2024-02-28 Thread wdennis--- via slurm-users
Thanks for the logical explanation, Paul. So when I rewrite my user documentation, I'll mention using `salloc` instead of `srun`. Yes, we do have `LaunchParameters=use_interactive_step` set on our cluster, so salloc gives a shell on the allocated host. Best, Will -- slurm-users mailing list -

[slurm-users] Re: salloc+srun vs just srun

2024-02-28 Thread Paul Edmon via slurm-users
He's talking about recent versions of Slurm which now have this option: https://slurm.schedmd.com/slurm.conf.html#OPT_use_interactive_step -Paul Edmon- On 2/28/2024 10:46 AM, Paul Raines wrote: What do you mean "operate via the normal command line"?  When you salloc, you are still on the logi

[slurm-users] Re: salloc+srun vs just srun

2024-02-28 Thread Paul Raines via slurm-users
What do you mean "operate via the normal command line"? When you salloc, you are still on the login node. $ salloc -p rtx6000 -A sysadm -N 1 --ntasks-per-node=1 --mem=20G --time=1-10:00:00 --gpus=2 --cpus-per-task=2 /bin/bash salloc: Pending job allocation 3798364 salloc: job 3798364 queued

[slurm-users] Re: salloc+srun vs just srun

2024-02-28 Thread Paul Edmon via slurm-users
salloc is the currently recommended way for interactive sessions. srun is now intended for launching steps or MPI applications. So properly you would salloc and then srun inside the salloc. As you've noticed with srun you tend lose control of your shell as it takes over so you have background