[Moabusers] Fairshare

[Laurence Dawson]

Dave,
The stability problems we were seeing here on the earlier version of 
moab 4.5 seem to be fixed with 4.5.0p4, and it is now running stably on 
our cluster with torque 2.1.0p0. We are ready to test the fairshare 
calculation change...how do I enable it?

Larry.

Dave Jackson wrote:
> Larry,
>
>   This capability was enabled in Moab 4.5.0 last week.  We are still in
> testing.  We will send you config details as soon as testing is
> complete.
>
> Thanks,
> Dave
>
> On Wed, 2006-02-01 at 12:51 -0600, Laurence Dawson wrote:
>   
>> Yes, that's exactly what we need.
>> Thanks - I'll look forward to trying it out.
>> Larry.
>>
>> Dave Jackson wrote:
>>     
>>> Larry,
>>>
>>>   You are correct that Moab calculates fairshare usage as a percentage
>>> of 'delivered' cycles.  In cases where the cluster is full and a backlog
>>> exists, this is often deemed the most fair and effective method.
>>> However, in a case where the cluster is not fully utilized, this can
>>> lead to issues such as you are seeing.  
>>>
>>>   We propose to enable a new policy whereby fairshare usage can be
>>> calculated as a percentage of theoretical (or potential) cycles.  This
>>> would result in the same job for job fairshare usage regardless of
>>> actual cluster workload conditions.
>>>
>>>   Would this work for you?  If so, we will get this to you this week.
>>>
>>> Dave
>>>
>>> On Wed, 2006-02-01 at 10:35 -0600, Laurence Dawson wrote:
>>>   
>>>       
>>>> We are working on cluster fairness and the way fairshare is calculated 
>>>> is not working very well for us. Fairshare is calculated on the basis of 
>>>> resource usage on the cluster and not on total resource availability. 
>>>> This means that users who submit jobs during very quiet periods are 
>>>> charged more against their fairshare than we want.
>>>> A simple example:
>>>> Day 1: 10 processors out of 1000 in use = 1%
>>>> Day 2: 10 processors out of 100 in use = 10%
>>>>
>>>> We want to be able to have the fairshare calculated on the basis of  
>>>> total resources available, so in both cases it would be (1200 total 
>>>> procs)/10. Is there a way of configuring this? Any ideas on alternative 
>>>> methods?
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> moabusers mailing list
>>>> moabusers at supercluster.org
>>>> http://www.supercluster.org/mailman/listinfo/moabusers
>>>>     
>>>>         
>>>   
>>>       
>
>