[GE users] Resource availabilty difference reported by qstat/qconf
reuti at staff.uni-marburg.de
Sun Dec 12 23:54:50 GMT 2010
Am 13.12.2010 um 00:31 schrieb paulu:
> Thanks a lot for the response.
> On Thursday 09 December 2010, reuti wrote:
>> Am 09.12.2010 um 00:16 schrieb paulu:
>>> I see a difference in the reported availability of a global
>>> consumables, depending on the method to show it. In this
>>> particular case it is about a requestable global consumable
>>> named mti_sim_total.
>>> qstat -F | grep gc:mti_sim_total | sort -u
>>> I get:
>> The output will change: you will see either gc: or gl:, depending
>> what's the tighter constraint (same for `qhost`).
> With qstat -F I always see gc:, never gl:.
> With qhost -F I see some global consumables reported as gc: and some
> as gl:. I have read the manual:
> 'l' - a load value reported for the resource,
> 'c' - availability derived from the consumable resources facility
> However, I cannot figure out why one resource is reported as 'l' and
> the other as 'c'. All are defined as global consumable resources in
> the same way. And all are reported by the load sensor. I am using SGE
both: the load sensor and complex value will be checked. The lower one (i.e. tighter constraint) will be used for the overall limit. To reflect which one set the limit, the indicator will switch between gc: and gl:
>>> SGE_SINGLE_LINE= qconf -se global | grep ^load_values
>>> I see:
>> This is the plain load value, left untouched.
> OK, clear.
> That then brings me to an additional (final) question: is it possible
> to see the available resources, according to just the current resource
> requests? So not adjusted by the load reports.
I think this would be useless: it would show one resource complex free, but as it's limited by a load sensor it would never get scheduled anyway. Only option I see: have a second complex w/o a load sensor and request always both.
> Currently, I only can
> see if requests have been made which do not actually use the requested
> resource (a floating license feature in my case). I would also be able
> to see the opposite: using a license feature without the proper
> request for it.
Then use only the load sensor and not a consumable complex. This might lead to race conditions of course, as jobs get scheduled and only thereafter it turns out, that they need a license which might not be available. Is it for FLEXlm or any other license management?
NB: When a job requests a license and is not using it, it would be to educate users to request the right things.
To unsubscribe from this discussion, e-mail: [users-unsubscribe at gridengine.sunsource.net].
More information about the gridengine-users