[GE users] qselect problem

Kirk Patton kpatton at transmeta.com
Fri May 7 16:05:40 BST 2004


On Wed, May 05, 2004 at 11:10:21AM +0200, Andreas Haas wrote:
> Hi Kirk,
> 
> the behaviour you encounter is the outcome of
> 
>    AH-2004-03-04-1: Bugfix:    qselect/qstat -l selection wrongly considers
>                                load and utilization
>                     Issue:     771
>                     Bugtraq:   5019624
>                     Review:    AS
> 
> the behaviour you possibly desire is a corresponding RFE #772. But why
> don't you specify immutable information such

The reason I used load sensors was that it is easier to set up.  Doing
it for each machine ment more administrative overhead for me.  The load
sensors look at the system and figure out what the correct value is.

Reguarding #772, is that only for SGE 6.0 then?  I am running 5.3p6 and there
does not seem to be a "-full" option to qselect.  I rather like the old behavior.

Kirk


> 
>    - os
>    - platform
>    - release
>    - ..
> 
> in each hosts complex_values list? You can use the qconf -?attr
> switch family (use "exechost" as obj_nm) for efficiently accomplishing
> this.
> 
> Using Grid Engine complex_values for non-mutable attributes has two
> fundamental benefits:
> 
>  (1) It lowers the amount of data that periodically needs to be
>      transfered from Execd to Qmaster and thus lowers effort
>      Qmaster on processing load reports.
> 
>  (2) It ensures this information is available even during
>      Execd maintainance shutdown. With load values a timeout
>      is in effect which causes them not be available after
>      a certain time when exec hosts queues change into
>      'unknown' state.
> 
> The #771 fix changed the problematic behaviour of qstat/qselect
> returning a mutuable set of queues variying with the clusters
> load/utilization situation. Anyone please realize qselect be used
> within scripts for changing particular queue's configuation: If load
> values were generally considered by qselect it wouldn't be usable
> for this purpose. It's true that in versions prior 5.3 this behaved
> differently.
> 
> Andy's and my take on this is that this is in fact is a bug since
> load/utilization were never considered in versions prior 5.3. Well,
> it's possible that users see this differently and we simly lack
> funded feedback from the Grid Engine users community.
> 
> As pointed out by Rayson reverting the #771 fix does not require
> major development effort.
> 
> RFC,
> Andreas
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe at gridengine.sunsource.net
> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help at gridengine.sunsource.net
> 

-- 
Kirk Patton
Unix Administrator
Transmeta Inc.
Tel. 408 919-3055

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe at gridengine.sunsource.net
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help at gridengine.sunsource.net




More information about the gridengine-users mailing list