1. What is your process_thread_count for the job (found in the job specification, and specifiable on submit command)? 2. What is your ducc.rm.share.quantum (specified in ducc.properties).
Say your quantum size allowed for 2 shares (aka "ducc job processes" or "JPs") per node, and your thread count allowed for 8 threads per share. In this case, 16 work items could fit on a single node. Say you have 4 nodes that each fit 2 shares. By specifying a process_thread_count of 1, you should then see 8 work items running in parallel across the 4 nodes, presuming they are of sufficient duration. Hope this helps. Lou. On Wed, Nov 5, 2014 at 8:55 PM, Thanh Tam Nguyen <nthanh...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Eddie, > I've checked the webserver. Since I have been testing on a small collection > of documents (20 documents), there were 15 work items for the job. > > Did you mean 500 work items per machine? > > Regards, > Tam > > On Thu, Nov 6, 2014 at 1:20 AM, Eddie Epstein <eaepst...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > There is a default limit of 500 work items dispatched at the same time. > How > > many dispatched are shown for the job? > > > > Eddie > > > > > > On Wed, Nov 5, 2014 at 3:11 AM, Thanh Tam Nguyen <nthanh...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > > > Hi Eddie, > > > Thanks for your email. I followed the documentation and I was able to > run > > > DUCC jobs using different user instead of user "ducc". But while I was > > > watching the webserver, I only found one machine running the jobs. In > the > > > tab System>Machines, I can see all the machine statuses are "up". What > > > should I do to run the jobs on all machines? > > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > Tam > > > > > > On Fri, Oct 31, 2014 at 9:37 PM, Eddie Epstein <eaepst...@gmail.com> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > Hi Tam, > > > > > > > > In the install documentation, > > > > http://uima.apache.org/d/uima-ducc-1.0.0/installation.html, > > > > the section "Multi-User Installation and Verification" describes how > to > > > > configure setuid-root > > > > for ducc_ling so that DUCC jobs are run as the submitting user > instead > > of > > > > user "ducc". > > > > > > > > The setuid-root ducc_ling should be put on every DUCC node, in the > same > > > > place, > > > > and ducc.properties updated to point at that location. > > > > > > > > Eddie > > > > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Oct 31, 2014 at 3:54 AM, Thanh Tam Nguyen < > nthanh...@gmail.com > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > Hi Eddie, > > > > > Would you tell me more details how to setup DUCC for multiuser > mode? > > > > FYI, I > > > > > have successfully setup and ran my UIMA analysis engine on single > > user > > > > > mode. I also followed DUCCBOOK to setup ducc_ling but I am sure how > > to > > > > get > > > > > it worked on a cluster of machines. > > > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > Tam > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Oct 30, 2014 at 11:08 PM, Eddie Epstein < > eaepst...@gmail.com > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > The $DUCC_RUNTIME tree needs to be on a shared filesystem > > accessible > > > > from > > > > > > all machines. > > > > > > For single user mode ducc_ling could be referenced from there as > > > well. > > > > > > But for multiuser setup, ducc_ling needs setuid and should be > > > installed > > > > > on > > > > > > the root drive. > > > > > > > > > > > > Eddie > > > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Oct 30, 2014 at 10:08 AM, James Baker < > > > james.d.ba...@gmail.com > > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > I've been working through the installation of UIMA DUCC, and > have > > > > > > > successfully got it set up and running on a single machine. I'd > > now > > > > > like > > > > > > to > > > > > > > move to running it on a cluster of machines, but it isn't clear > > to > > > me > > > > > > from > > > > > > > the installation guide as to whether I need to install DUCC on > > each > > > > > node, > > > > > > > or whether ducc_ling is the only thing that needs installing on > > the > > > > > > > non-head nodes. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Could anyone shed some light on the process please? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > > > James > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
