Hi Michael,
Yes, without the singleton it works as expected:
$ sbatch --hold fakejob.sh
Submitted batch job 26636869
$ sbatch --hold fakejob.sh
Submitted batch job 26636870
$ sbatch --hold fakejob.sh
Submitted batch job 26636871
$ scontrol update jobid=26636870 Dependency=after:26636871
$ scontrol update jobid=26636871 Dependency=after:26636869
$ scontrol release 26636869 26636870 26636871
$ squeue -u jarno
JOBID USER ACCOUNT NAME ST TIME_LEFT NODES CPUS
GRES MIN_MEM NODELIST (REASON)
26636869 jarno def-jarno_cp fakejob R 1:35 1 1
(null) 250M cdr650 (None)
26636871 jarno def-jarno_cp fakejob R 1:39 1 1
(null) 250M cdr652 (None)
26636870 jarno def-jarno_cp fakejob R 1:42 1 1
(null) 250M cdr667 (None)
Thanks,
Jarno
Jarno van der Kolk, PhD Phys.
Analyste principal en informatique scientifique | Senior Scientific Computing
Specialist
Solutions TI | IT Solutions
Université d’Ottawa | University of Ottawa
________________________________
From: slurm-users <slurm-users-boun...@lists.schedmd.com> on behalf of Michael
Di Domenico <mdidomeni...@gmail.com>
Sent: August 28, 2019 10:26 AM
To: Slurm User Community List <slurm-users@lists.schedmd.com>
Subject: Re: [slurm-users] Dependencies with singleton and after
Attention : courriel externe | external email
just curious. if you leave out the singleton, do you get the behavior
as expected?
On Tue, Aug 27, 2019 at 9:42 AM Jarno van der Kolk <jvand...@uottawa.ca> wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> I'm still puzzled by the expected behaviour of the following:
> $ sbatch --hold fakejob.sh
> Submitted batch job 25909273
> $ sbatch --hold fakejob.sh
> Submitted batch job 25909274
> $ sbatch --hold fakejob.sh
> Submitted batch job 25909275
> $ scontrol update jobid=25909273 Dependency=singleton
> $ scontrol update jobid=25909274 Dependency=singleton,after:25909275
> $ scontrol update jobid=25909275 Dependency=singleton,after:25909273
> $ scontrol release 25909273 25909274 25909275
>
> I expected these to be executed as 25909273, 25909275, 25909274. However, it
> seems that singletons are executed in order of submission so that this leads
> to a circular dependency. That is, 25909274 depends on 25909275 due to
> "after", and 25909275 depends on 25909274 due to "singleton" plus order of
> submission.
>
> From the man page for sbatch, that wasn't really clear to me:
> singleton
> This job can begin execution after any previously
> launched jobs sharing the same
> job name and user have terminated.
>
> I'm somewhat interested in creating a patch for this, but before I can look
> into this, I'll need to know what the expected behaviour is.
> If "launched" means submitted to the queue and preserving order, then I
> should focus on the circular dependency detection.
> If "launched" means entered the running state without preserving order, then
> I should focus on the dependency resolving.
>
> Any thoughts on this?
>
> Thanks,
> Jarno
>
> Jarno van der Kolk, PhD Phys.
> Analyste principal en informatique scientifique | Senior Scientific Computing
> Specialist
> Solutions TI | IT Solutions
> Université d’Ottawa | University of Ottawa
>
