You'll get passionate advocates from all the various resource managers - there really isn't a right/wrong answer. Torque is more widely used, but any of them will do.
None are perfect, IMHO. On Jul 7, 2010, at 1:16 PM, Douglas Guptill wrote: > On Wed, Jul 07, 2010 at 12:37:54PM -0600, Ralph Castain wrote: > >> No....afraid not. Things work pretty well, but there are places >> where things just don't mesh. Sub-node allocation in particular is >> an issue as it implies binding, and slurm and ompi have conflicting >> methods. >> >> It all can get worked out, but we have limited time and nobody cares >> enough to put in the effort. Slurm just isn't used enough to make it >> worthwhile (too small an audience). > > I am about to get my first HPC cluster (128 nodes), and was > considering slurm. We do use MPI. > > Should I be looking at Torque instead for a queue manager? > > Suggestions appreciated, > Douglas. > -- > Douglas Guptill voice: 902-461-9749 > Research Assistant, LSC 4640 email: douglas.gupt...@dal.ca > Oceanography Department fax: 902-494-3877 > Dalhousie University > Halifax, NS, B3H 4J1, Canada > > _______________________________________________ > users mailing list > us...@open-mpi.org > http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/users
