[GE users] Help needed with schedule priorities

fx d.love at liverpool.ac.uk
Thu Nov 19 16:09:39 GMT 2009


ffelix <ffelixr at gmail.com> writes:

> Hello Reuti,
>
> Yes, I understand the philosophy of SGE with respect to queues. The
> problem is that I think gLite middleware was initially designed to
> work with Torque where priorities are assigned to queues and the user
> chooses the queue.

We have the same situation, having to accept LCG jobs, and I objected to
having to set up a special queue, but that's the least of the ways that
stuff insists on breaking reasonable policies on your cluster.  (Also it
doesn't help communication that everything seems to have a
non-conventional name in that world.)

> Later, a SGE adaptor appeared and we moved to it
> because SGE solved more problems for us than Torque but now we are
> facing this limitation that we don't know how to overcome

I'm not clear quite what the problem is and why the normal SGE policy
mechanisms don't do the job.  Assuming you can define a special queue
for these jobs, you can set a priority on it and have the scheduling
policy take that into account with sufficient weight.  If all else
fails, you can do arbitrary things with a JSV for submissions to that
queue in a recent-enough SGE.  (Managing a queue may be easier than
managing the large mess of VOMS(?) ids that we get here.)  I'm
interested to understand this in case there's something we've missed.

> Maybe the solution is to modify the adaptor that, at the end, is what
> launches the qsub commands...

It would be worth publishing if you can provide something acceptable to
the glite world generally.

------------------------------------------------------
http://gridengine.sunsource.net/ds/viewMessage.do?dsForumId=38&dsMessageId=228002

To unsubscribe from this discussion, e-mail: [users-unsubscribe at gridengine.sunsource.net].



More information about the gridengine-users mailing list