IAS is definitely interesting place. I'll have to look up Dima in the
directory.
On 10/28/2011 07:16 PM, Peter St. John wrote:
> Prentice,
> No, I didin't mean to imply anything specific about e.g. your budget,
> but IAS has a fantastic reputation.
> Say hi to Dima for me, he plays Go and is an al
Prentice,
No, I didin't mean to imply anything specific about e.g. your budget, but
IAS has a fantastic reputation.
Say hi to Dima for me, he plays Go and is an algebraic geometer visiting
this year.
Peter
On Fri, Oct 28, 2011 at 6:21 PM, Prentice Bisbal wrote:
>
> On 10/28/2011 04:56 PM, Peter
On 10/28/2011 04:56 PM, Peter St. John wrote:
> I think Greg is right on the money. Particularly at a place like IAS,
> where resources are good and users may be errant but are doing great
> things,
Have you been a visitor, member or staff member at IAS?
--
Prentice
_
I think Greg is right on the money. Particularly at a place like IAS, where
resources are good and users may be errant but are doing great things, I'd
have a sequence of limits; first, a mail warning ("Your job PID 666 has
consumed one million core hours, and its priority will be decremented in
500
I was still supporting those only 4 years ago. Much heavier than a Dell
or HP workstation. Will fix 'layer 8' problems in a jiffy.
--
Prentice
On 10/28/2011 02:33 PM, Sabuj Pattanayek wrote:
> I don't know, maybe we drop this on their head:
>
> http://i.imgur.com/VWxyF.jpg
>
> or worse, switch ou
> > if someone persisted in stealing cycles, we'd lock their account.
>
> Exactly. Or visit them with a sucker rod. Or have a department chair
> have a "talk" with them.
>
> Human to human interactions and controls work better than installing
> complex tools or automated constraints.
I can'
Of Sabuj Pattanayek
> Sent: Friday, October 28, 2011 11:34 AM
> To: Beowulf Mailing List
> Subject: Re: [Beowulf] Users abusing screen
>
> I don't know, maybe we drop this on their head:
>
> http://i.imgur.com/VWxyF.jpg
>
> or worse, switch out their linux workst
I don't know, maybe we drop this on their head:
http://i.imgur.com/VWxyF.jpg
or worse, switch out their linux workstation with it.
On Fri, Oct 28, 2011 at 1:27 PM, Jesse Becker wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 28, 2011 at 02:22:03PM -0400, Sabuj Pattanayek wrote:
>>
>> http://i.imgur.com/G0pjk.jpg
>>
>> It
On Fri, Oct 28, 2011 at 02:22:03PM -0400, Sabuj Pattanayek wrote:
>http://i.imgur.com/G0pjk.jpg
>
>It's also got a nice foam layer on the bopping side.
Then it's just a prop. What's the *real* one look like?
--
Jesse Becker
NHGRI Linux support (Digicon Contractor)
__
> Human to human interactions and controls work better than installing
> complex tools or automated constraints. Sure, sucker rods are a joke
> and no we don't actually bop users on the head or the desk or whomp them
> upside the head with a manual, but in most cases a stern talking to
> followed
On Thu, 27 Oct 2011, Mark Hahn wrote:
> if someone persisted in stealing cycles, we'd lock their account.
Exactly. Or visit them with a sucker rod. Or have a department chair
have a "talk" with them.
Human to human interactions and controls work better than installing
complex tools or automate
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 10/27/2011 04:37 PM, Mark Hahn wrote:
>> nice 'pam_slurm' module which allows a user to login only to those nodes
>> on which the said user has active jobs (allocated through slurm). The
>
> I think this is slightly BOFHish, too. do people actually
> nice 'pam_slurm' module which allows a user to login only to those nodes
> on which the said user has active jobs (allocated through slurm). The
I think this is slightly BOFHish, too. do people actually have problems
with users stealing cycles this way? the issue is actually stealing,
and we s
Am 27.10.2011 um 21:33 schrieb Prentice Bisbal:
> On 10/27/2011 03:19 PM, Nicholas M Glykos wrote:
>>
>>> Exactly. That's why I don't want to automate killing jobs longer than X
>>> days.
>> Probably irrelevant after so many suggestions, but Caos NSA had this very
>> nice 'pam_slurm' module whic
On 10/27/2011 03:19 PM, Nicholas M Glykos wrote:
>
>> Exactly. That's why I don't want to automate killing jobs longer than X
>> days.
> Probably irrelevant after so many suggestions, but Caos NSA had this very
> nice 'pam_slurm' module which allows a user to login only to those nodes
> on which
> Exactly. That's why I don't want to automate killing jobs longer than X
> days.
Probably irrelevant after so many suggestions, but Caos NSA had this very
nice 'pam_slurm' module which allows a user to login only to those nodes
on which the said user has active jobs (allocated through slurm).
On Wed, Oct 26, 2011 at 02:55:13PM -0600, Mark Hahn wrote:
> > sometime, and I've never seen a comment like yours before. You're out of
> > line.
>
> hah. Greg doesn't post all that much, but he's no stranger to the flame ;)
>
> seriously, your question seemed to be about a general problem,
> bu
On 10/27/2011 01:41 AM, Greg Lindahl wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 26, 2011 at 05:14:13PM -0400, Steve Crusan wrote:
>
>> If the issue is processes that run for far too long, and are abusing
>> the system, cgroups or 'pushing' the users to use a batch system seems
>> to work better than writing scripts to
On Wed, Oct 26, 2011 at 05:14:13PM -0400, Steve Crusan wrote:
> If the issue is processes that run for far too long, and are abusing
> the system, cgroups or 'pushing' the users to use a batch system seems
> to work better than writing scripts to make decisions on killing
> processes.
What I saw
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Oct 26, 2011, at 4:55 PM, Mark Hahn wrote:
>> sometime, and I've never seen a comment like yours before. You're out of
>> line.
>
> hah. Greg doesn't post all that much, but he's no stranger to the flame ;)
>
> seriously, your question seemed t
> sometime, and I've never seen a comment like yours before. You're out of
> line.
hah. Greg doesn't post all that much, but he's no stranger to the flame ;)
seriously, your question seemed to be about a general problem,
but your motive, ulterior or not, seemed to be to get rid of screen.
IMO,
On 10/26/2011 12:22 PM, Robert G. Brown wrote:
> Myself, I like the sucker rod approach. BANG down on the desk with it
> and say something ominous like "So, you've been cluttering up my server
> with unattended and abandoned sessions. Would you be so kind as to
> CEASE (bam) and DESIST (bam) fro
OK, OK, I haven't participated in this discussion so far -- way too
busy. But since it keeps on going, and going, and going, and since
nobody has mentioned the obvious and permanent solution, I'm going to
have to bring it up:
>From "man 8 syslogd", which alas seems to no longer exist save in our
On Fri, Oct 21, 2011 at 15:10, Prentice Bisbal wrote:
> Periodically, when I have to shutdown/reboot a system for maintenance,
> I find a LOT of shells being run through the screen command for users
> who aren't logged in. The majority are idle shells, but many are running
> jobs, that seem to be
On 10/25/2011 07:13 PM, Greg Lindahl wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 24, 2011 at 09:46:49AM -0400, Prentice Bisbal wrote:
>
>> The systems where screen is being abused are not part of the batch
>> system, and they will not /can not be for reasons I don't want to get
>> into here. The problem with killing long
On Mon, Oct 24, 2011 at 09:46:49AM -0400, Prentice Bisbal wrote:
> The systems where screen is being abused are not part of the batch
> system, and they will not /can not be for reasons I don't want to get
> into here. The problem with killing long-running programs is that there
> are often long r
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 22/10/11 00:10, Prentice Bisbal wrote:
> I have a question that isn't directly related to clusters, but I suspect
> it's an issue many of you are dealing with are dealt with: users using
> the screen command to stay logged in on systems and running
Anything is possible if you're a good enough programmer. Like I said
earlier, there are some users legitimately running long jobs on the
systems in question. Instead of developing a clever program to
automatically kill long running screen jobs, I think it would be better
to be up front with my user
On 10/24/2011 02:30 AM, Jan Wender wrote:
> On 10/21/2011 03:10 PM, Prentice Bisbal wrote:
>> I have a question that isn't directly related to clusters, but I suspect
>> it's an issue many of you are dealing with are dealt with: users using
>> the screen command to stay logged in on systems and ru
On 10/22/2011 08:02 AM, Ellis H. Wilson III wrote:
> On 10/21/11 15:14, Andrew Piskorski wrote:
>> On Fri, Oct 21, 2011 at 09:10:18AM -0400, Prentice Bisbal wrote:
>>
>>> My opinion is these these are shared resources, and if you aren't
>>> interactively using them, you should log out to free up re
Am 24.10.2011 um 13:00 schrieb Gregory Matthews:
> Prentice Bisbal wrote:
>> Using nohup was exactly the advice I gave to one of my users yesterday.
>> Not sure if he'll use it. 'man' is a very difficult program to learn,
>> from what I understand.
>
> our experience of ppl using nohup without re
Prentice Bisbal wrote:
> Using nohup was exactly the advice I gave to one of my users yesterday.
> Not sure if he'll use it. 'man' is a very difficult program to learn,
> from what I understand.
our experience of ppl using nohup without really thinking it through is
eventually filling the partiti
On 10/21/2011 03:10 PM, Prentice Bisbal wrote:
> I have a question that isn't directly related to clusters, but I suspect
> it's an issue many of you are dealing with are dealt with: users using
> the screen command to stay logged in on systems and running long jobs
> that they forget about. Have a
On 10/22/11 05:02, Ellis H. Wilson III wrote:
>
> Insane? I mean, I do a lot of work on a bunch of different distros and
> hardware types, and have found little use for screen /unless/ I was on a
> really, really poor internet connection that cut out on the minutes
> level. Can you give some exam
On 10/21/11 15:14, Andrew Piskorski wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 21, 2011 at 09:10:18AM -0400, Prentice Bisbal wrote:
>
>> My opinion is these these are shared resources, and if you aren't
>> interactively using them, you should log out to free up resources for
>> others.
>
> "running under screen" != "n
On Fri, Oct 21, 2011 at 09:10:18AM -0400, Prentice Bisbal wrote:
> My opinion is these these are shared resources, and if you aren't
> interactively using them, you should log out to free up resources for
> others.
"running under screen" != "non-interactive".
> I would like to remove screen from
On 10/21/11 12:12, Prentice Bisbal wrote:
>> If you give them an alternative that is well defined with an example
>> (not just, "Oh you can use such-and-such instead.") I can hardly believe
>> they'll be all that upset.
>>
>
> Ellis,
>
> Using nohup was exactly the advice I gave to one of my user
On 10/21/2011 11:44 AM, Ellis H. Wilson III wrote:
> On 10/21/11 09:10, Prentice Bisbal wrote:
>> Beowulfers,
>>
>> I have a question that isn't directly related to clusters, but I suspect
>> it's an issue many of you are dealing with are dealt with: users using
>> the screen command to stay logged
On 10/21/2011 11:24 AM, Reuti wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Am 21.10.2011 um 15:10 schrieb Prentice Bisbal:
>
>> Beowulfers,
>>
>> I have a question that isn't directly related to clusters, but I suspect
>> it's an issue many of you are dealing with are dealt with: users using
>> the screen command to stay lo
On 10/21/2011 11:06 AM, Kilian Cavalotti wrote:
> Hi Prentice,
>
> On Fri, Oct 21, 2011 at 4:44 PM, Prentice Bisbal wrote:
>>> Have you thought about queueing systems like condor or SGE?
>>
>> Yes, I have cluster that uses SGE, and we allow users to run serial jobs
>> (non-MPI, etc.) there, so th
On 10/21/11 09:10, Prentice Bisbal wrote:
> Beowulfers,
>
> I have a question that isn't directly related to clusters, but I suspect
> it's an issue many of you are dealing with are dealt with: users using
> the screen command to stay logged in on systems and running long jobs
> that they forget a
Am 21.10.2011 um 17:06 schrieb Kilian Cavalotti:
> Hi Prentice,
>
> On Fri, Oct 21, 2011 at 4:44 PM, Prentice Bisbal wrote:
>>> Have you thought about queueing systems like condor or SGE?
>>
>> Yes, I have cluster that uses SGE, and we allow users to run serial jobs
>> (non-MPI, etc.) there, so
Hi,
Am 21.10.2011 um 15:10 schrieb Prentice Bisbal:
> Beowulfers,
>
> I have a question that isn't directly related to clusters, but I suspect
> it's an issue many of you are dealing with are dealt with: users using
> the screen command to stay logged in on systems and running long jobs
> that t
On 10/21/2011 11:06 AM, Kilian Cavalotti wrote:
> Hi Prentice,
>
> On Fri, Oct 21, 2011 at 4:44 PM, Prentice Bisbal wrote:
>>> Have you thought about queueing systems like condor or SGE?
>>
>> Yes, I have cluster that uses SGE, and we allow users to run serial jobs
>> (non-MPI, etc.) there, so t
Hi Prentice,
On Fri, Oct 21, 2011 at 4:44 PM, Prentice Bisbal wrote:
>> Have you thought about queueing systems like condor or SGE?
>
> Yes, I have cluster that uses SGE, and we allow users to run serial jobs
> (non-MPI, etc.) there, so there is no need for them to use screen to
> execute long-ru
On 10/21/2011 09:44 AM, Henning Fehrmann wrote:
> Hi Prentice,
>
> On Fri, Oct 21, 2011 at 09:10:18AM -0400, Prentice Bisbal wrote:
>> Beowulfers,
>>
>> I have a question that isn't directly related to clusters, but I suspect
>> it's an issue many of you are dealing with are dealt with: users us
On 21/10/11 14:10, Prentice Bisbal wrote:
> Beowulfers,
>
> I have a question that isn't directly related to clusters, but I suspect
> it's an issue many of you are dealing with are dealt with: users using
> the screen command to stay logged in on systems and running long jobs
> that they forget a
Beowulfers,
I have a question that isn't directly related to clusters, but I suspect
it's an issue many of you are dealing with are dealt with: users using
the screen command to stay logged in on systems and running long jobs
that they forget about. Have any of you experienced this, and how did
yo
48 matches
Mail list logo
