I am pretty sure you need something like the following (courtesy of Reuti):
weight_tickets_share 10000000 weight_user 0.900000 weight_project 0.000000 weight_department 0.000000 weight_job 0.100000 weight_tickets_functional 100000 weight_tickets_share 0 policy_hierarchy F On Mon, Oct 9, 2017 at 2:01 PM, David Rosenstrauch <[email protected]> wrote: > I'm a bit of a SGE noob, so please bear with me. We're in the process of > a first-time SGE deploy for the users in our department. Although we've > been able to use SGE, submit jobs to the queues successfully, etc., we're > running into issues trying to get the fair-share scheduling - specifically > the functional scheduling - to work correctly. > > We have very simple functional scheduling enabled, via the following > configuration settings: > > enforce_user auto > auto_user_fshare 100 > weight_tickets_functional 10000 > schedd_job_info true > > (In addition, the "weight_tickets_share" setting is set to 0, thereby > disabling share tree scheduling.) > > A colleague and I are testing this setup by both of us submitting multiple > jobs to one of our queues simultaneously, with me first submitting a large > number of jobs (100) and he submitting a fewer number (25) shortly > afterwards. Our understanding is that the functional scheduling policy > should prevent one user from having their jobs completely dominate a > queue. And so our expectation is that even though my jobs were submitted > first, and there are more of them, the scheduler should wind up giving his > jobs a higher priority so that he is not forced to wait until all of my > jobs complete before his run. (If he did have to wait, that would > effectively be FIFO scheduling, not fair share.) > > Although we aren't seeing FIFO scheduling, we're seeing close to it. One > of his jobs (eventually) gets assigned a high number of tickets, and a > higher priority, and gets scheduled and run. But the remaining several > dozen sit in the queue and don't get run until all of mine complete - which > is not really fair share. > > Although it does look like functional scheduling is happening to some > extent (at least one of his jobs is getting prioritized ahead of mine) this > scheduling behavior is not what we were expecting to see. Our expectation > was that one of his jobs would run for every 4 of mine (more or less), and > that his jobs would not wind up queued up to run after mine complete. > > > Any idea what might be going on here? Do I have my system misconfigured > for functional scheduling? Or am I just misunderstanding how this is > supposed to work? I've already done quite a bit of googling and man page > reading on the relevant topics and settings, but wasn't able to find a good > explanation for the behavior we're seeing. Any help greatly appreciated! > > Thanks, > > DR > _______________________________________________ > users mailing list > [email protected] > https://gridengine.org/mailman/listinfo/users > -- Ian Kaufman Research Systems Administrator UC San Diego, Jacobs School of Engineering ikaufman AT ucsd DOT edu
_______________________________________________ users mailing list [email protected] https://gridengine.org/mailman/listinfo/users
