Prentice (and others) — if the NodeWeight/topology plugin interaction bothers you, feel free to tack onto bug 6384.
https://bugs.schedmd.com/show_bug.cgi?id=6384 > On Jan 22, 2019, at 1:15 PM, Prentice Bisbal <pbis...@pppl.gov> wrote: > > Killian, > > Thanks for the input. Unfortunately, all of this information from you, Ryan > and others, is really ruining my plans, since it makes it look like my plan > to fix a problem wit my cluster will not be as easy to fix as I'd hoped. One > of the issues with my "Frankencluster" is that I'd like to assign jobs to > different nodes based on the network they're on (1 GbE, 10 GbE, IB), along > with other criteria, such as features requested. > > I think it might be best if I write a longer e-mail to this list describing > my cluster architecture, the problems I'm trying to address, and different > possible approaches, and then get this list's feedback. > > Prentice > > On 1/18/19 11:53 AM, Kilian Cavalotti wrote: >> On Fri, Jan 18, 2019 at 6:31 AM Prentice Bisbal <pbis...@pppl.gov> wrote: >>>> Note that if you care about node weights (eg. NodeName=whatever001 >>>> Weight=2, etc. in slurm.conf), using the topology function will disable >>>> it. I believe I was promised a warning about that in the future in a >>>> conversation with SchedMD. >>> Well, that's going to be a big problem for me. One of the goals of me >>> overhauling our Slurm config is to take advantage of the node weighting >>> function to prioritize certain hardware over others in our very >>> heterogeneous cluster. >> I've heard that too (that enabling the Topology plugin would disable >> node weighting), but I don't think it's accurate, both from the >> documentation and from observation. >> >> The doc actually says (https://slurm.schedmd.com/topology.html) >> >> """ >> NOTE:Slurm first identifies the network switches which provide the >> best fit for pending jobs and then selectes the nodes with the lowest >> "weight" within those switches. If optimizing resource selection by >> node weight is more important than optimizing network topology then do >> NOT use the topology/tree plugin. >> """ >> >> So the Topology plugin does take precedence over the weighting >> algorithm, but it doesn't disable it, AFAIK. And for sites using >> disjoint networks, as we do, this is a sane behavior. >> >> Cheers, > -- ____ || \\UTGERS, |---------------------------*O*--------------------------- ||_// the State | Ryan Novosielski - novos...@rutgers.edu || \\ University | Sr. Technologist - 973/972.0922 (2x0922) ~*~ RBHS Campus || \\ of NJ | Office of Advanced Research Computing - MSB C630, Newark `'
