It appears we've averaged almost 77% utilisation
since the beginning of 2004 (when our current usage
system records begin).
Thank you very much for the data point!
I've insisted here that above 70% utilization is very good,
given the random nature of demand and jobs on queues in the academia, etc.
that sounds very strange to me. do you really mean that
30% of your cpu time is idle? I wonder whether there could be a big
difference in methodology. for instance, if you're using an MPI library
(probably based on tcp) that doesn't spin-wait but blocks as for disk IO
say 20% of the time, then you might consider this to be 80% utilization.
an MPI that spin-waits might show 100% with the same perf/throughput.
70% utilization is terrible if you really mean "fraction of allocatable cpu
time occupied by jobs". that is at the job scheduler level, not at the
kernel scheduler level.
However, some folks would want more than 90% efficiency to get happy.
I would be embarassed to have less than 90%. perhaps 70% would make sense
for a cluster dedicated to a small or narrowly-defined group. I find that
a sufficient userbase means you _always_ have something to run, of any
size/resource available.
_______________________________________________
Beowulf mailing list, Beowulf@beowulf.org
To change your subscription (digest mode or unsubscribe) visit
http://www.beowulf.org/mailman/listinfo/beowulf
