Re: [slurm-users] Allocate more memory

What about if you increase swap memory? Virtual memory would increase as well, and maybe the app would run. Of course if it works, the performance could be very very poor. El mié., 7 feb. 2018 16:53, david vilanova escribió: > Thanks all for your comments, i will look into that > > El El mié, 7

Re: [slurm-users] Allocate more memory

Thanks all for your comments, i will look into that El El mié, 7 feb 2018 a las 16:37, Loris Bennett escribió: > > I was make the unwarranted assumption that you have multiple processes. > So if you have a single process which needs more than 2GB, Ralph is of > course right and there is nothing

Re: [slurm-users] Allocate more memory

I was make the unwarranted assumption that you have multiple processes. So if you have a single process which needs more than 2GB, Ralph is of course right and there is nothing you can do. However, you are using R, so, depending on your problem, you may be able to make use of a package like Rmpi

Re: [slurm-users] Allocate more memory

Hi David – You might consider running your more memory intensive jobs on the XSede machine at the Pittsburgh Supercomputing Center. It’s called Bridges. Bridges has a set of 42 large memory (LM) nodes, each with 3 TBytes of private memory. 9 of the nodes have 64 cores; the rest each have 80. T

Re: [slurm-users] Allocate more memory

Yes, when working with the human genome you can easily go up to 16Gb. El El mié, 7 feb 2018 a las 16:20, Krieger, Donald N. escribió: > Sorry for jumping in without full knowledge of the thread. > But it sounds like the key issue is that each job requires 3 GBytes. > Even if that's true, won't j

Re: [slurm-users] Allocate more memory

Sorry for jumping in without full knowledge of the thread. But it sounds like the key issue is that each job requires 3 GBytes. Even if that's true, won't jobs start on cores with less memory and then just page? Of course as the previous post states, you must tailor your slurm request to the phys

Re: [slurm-users] Allocate more memory

Afraid not - since you don’t have any nodes that meet the 3G requirement, you’ll just hang. > On Feb 7, 2018, at 7:01 AM, david vilanova wrote: > > Thanks for the quick response. > > Should the following script do the trick ?? meaning use all required nodes to > have at least 3G total memory

Re: [slurm-users] Allocate more memory

Thanks for the quick response. Should the following script do the trick ?? meaning use all required nodes to have at least 3G total memory ? even though my nodes were setup with 2G each ?? #SBATCH array 1-10%10:1 #SBATCH mem-per-cpu=3000m srun R CMD BATCH myscript.R thanks On 07/02/

Re: [slurm-users] Allocate more memory

I’m afraid neither of those versions is going to solve the problem here - there is no way to allocate memory across nodes. Simple reason: there is no way for a process to directly address memory on a separate node - you’d have to implement that via MPI or shmem or some other library. > On Feb

Re: [slurm-users] Allocate more memory

Loris Bennett writes: > Hi David, > > david martin writes: > >>  >> >> Hi, >> >> I would like to submit a job that requires 3Go. The problem is that I have >> 70 nodes available each node with 2Gb memory. >> >> So the command sbatch --mem=3G will wait for ressources to become available. >> >

Re: [slurm-users] Allocate more memory

Hi David, david martin writes: >  > > Hi, > > I would like to submit a job that requires 3Go. The problem is that I have 70 > nodes available each node with 2Gb memory. > > So the command sbatch --mem=3G will wait for ressources to become available. > > Can I run sbatch and tell the cluster

[slurm-users] Allocate more memory

 Hi, I would like to submit a job that requires 3Go. The problem is that I have 70 nodes available each node with 2Gb memory. So the command sbatch --mem=3G will wait for ressources to become available. Can I run sbatch and tell the cluster to use the 3Go out of the 70Go available or is

Re: [slurm-users] Single user consuming all resources of the cluster

We use GrpTresRunMins for this, with the idea that it's OK for users to occupy lots of resources with short-running jobs, but not so much with long-running jobs. On Wed, Feb 7, 2018 at 8:41 AM, Bill Barth wrote: > Of course, Matteo. Happy to help. Our job completion script is: > > #!/bin/bash >

Re: [slurm-users] Single user consuming all resources of the cluster

Of course, Matteo. Happy to help. Our job completion script is: #!/bin/bash OUTFILE=/var/log/slurm/tacc_jobs_completed echo "$JOBID:$UID:$ACCOUNT:$BATCH:$START:$END:$SUBMIT:$PARTITION:$LIMIT:$JOBNAME:$JOBSTATE:$NODECNT:$PROCS" >> $OUTFILE exit 0 and our config settings (from scontrol show co

Re: [slurm-users] Is QOS always inherited explicitly?

Hi Yair, Thanks for the information. I guess I'll just have to try it out. I did have multiple QOS working fine. However, after I modified one of the QOS the users suddenly couldn't use any of the non-default QOS. Maybe I'll have a look at the database myself too. Cheers, Loris Yair Yarom w

Re: [slurm-users] Is QOS always inherited explicitly?

Hi, >From my experience - yes, new associations will be associated with the QOS of the account. I believe it doesn't explicitly modifies all the associations, just notifies you which associations will be affected. Looking at my database suggests that indeed most associations don't have explicit