March 2024 - slurm-users - lists.schedmd.com

job_container/tmpfs and srun.
by Phill Harvey-Smith 17 Jan '25

17 Jan '25

Hi all, On our setup we are using job_container/tmpfs to give each job it's own temp space. Since our compute nodes have reasonably sized disks for tasks that do a lot of disk I/O on user's data we have asked users to copy their data to the local disk at the beginning of the task and (if needed) copy it back at the end. This saves lots of NFS thrashing slowing down both the task and the NFS servers. However some of our users are having problems with this, their initial sbatch script … [View More]

2 1

AllowAccounts partition setting
by Marko Markoc 17 Oct '24

17 Oct '24

Hi All, At one point, when we were running slurm 22, we set up a few new partitions with `AllowAccounts` setting enabled. We limit access to these partitions only to a few accounts. We manually create these accounts and users using the `sacctmgr` command. At that time, everything was working. Only users in these accounts were able to run jobs in that partition. Few months ago we upgraded slurm to 23.02.7 but just a couple of days ago we noticed that anyone could submit jobs to these partitions.… [View More]

6 8

Can't schedule on cloud node: State=IDLE+CLOUD+POWERED_DOWN+NOT_RESPONDING
by Xaver Stiensmeier 20 Sep '24

20 Sep '24

Dear slurm-user list, I have a cloud node that is powered up and down on demand. Rarely it can happen that slurm's resumeTimeout is reached and the node is therefore powered down. We have set ReturnToService=2 in order to avoid the node being marked down, because the instance behind that node is created on demand and therefore after a failure nothing stops the system to start the node again as it is a different instance. I thought this would be enough, but apparently the node is still marked … [View More]

2 3

Interfaces of topology/tree and Topology Awareness
by nico.derl＠tutanota.com 15 Apr '24

15 Apr '24

Hello everyone, I'm trying to improve topology awareness in a local Slurm-managed HPC system. It's using the default hierarchical 3-level topology with the tree-plugin. It however does not always confine jobs to the most tightly packed group of nodes, seems to over-provision switches for smaller jobs, and gets slow or overwhelmed with jobs that have a high node count. I'd like to implement something more literally aligned with best-fit, but I'm having trouble understanding the relevant … [View More]

2 1

PMIxDirectConn Setting
by efweber＠uwe.nsa.gov 28 Mar '24

28 Mar '24

Hi, The documentation for mpi.conf says: PMIxDirectConn={true|false} Disable direct launching of tasks. Default is "true". I'm finding this a bit confusing. Does true really mean that Direct Connection is disabled? I would have thought true meant enabled. Thanks

1 0

Incorrect hyperthreading with Slurm 23.11
by Guillaume COCHARD 28 Mar '24

28 Mar '24

Hello, We have upgraded our cluster to Slurm 23.11.1 then, a few weeks later, to 23.11.4. Since then, Slurm doesn't detect hyperthreaded CPUs. We have downgraded our test cluster, the issue is not present with Slurm 22.05 (we had skipped Slurm 23.02). For example, we are working with this node: $ slurmd -C NodeName=node03 CPUs=40 Boards=1 SocketsPerBoard=2 CoresPerSocket=10 ThreadsPerCore=2 RealMemory=128215 It is defined like this in slurm.conf: SelectTypeParameters=CR_CPU_Memory … [View More]TaskPlugin=task/cgroup,task/affinity NodeName=node03 CPUs=40 RealMemory=150000 Feature=htc MemSpecLimit=5000 NodeSet=htc Feature=htc PartitionName=htc Default=YES MinNodes=0 MaxNodes=1 Nodes=htc DefMemPerCPU=1000 State=UP LLN=Yes MaxMemPerNode=142000 So no oversubscribing, 20 cores and 40 CPUs thanks to hyperthreading. Until the updgrade, Slurm was allocating those 40 CPUs: when launching 40 jobs of 1 CPU, each of those job would use one 1 CPU. This is the expected behavior. Since the upgrade, we can still launch those 40 jobs, but only the first half of the CPUs will be used (CPUs 0 to 19 according to htop). Each of those CPUs is used by 2 jobs, and the second half of the CPUs (#20 to 39) stay completely idle. When launching 40 stress processes directly in the node without using Slurm all the CPUs are used. When allocating a specific CPU with srun, it works until CPU #19 and then an error occurs even if the allocation includes all the CPUs of the node: #SBATCH --ntasks=1 #SBATCH --cpus-per-task=40 # Works for 0 to 19 srun --cpu-bind=v,map_cpu:19 stress.py # Doesn't work (20 to 39) srun --cpu-bind=v,map_cpu:20 stress.py # Output: srun: error: CPU binding outside of job step allocation, allocated CPUs are: 0x00000FFFFF. srun: error: Task launch for StepId=57194.0 failed on node node03: Unable to satisfy cpu bind request srun: error: Application launch failed: Unable to satisfy cpu bind request srun: Job step aborted This behaviour concerns all our nodes, some of which have been restarted recently and others have not. This causes the jobs to be frequently interrupted, augmenting the difference between the system real time and user+system times and making the jobs slower. We have been peering the documentation but, from what we understand, our configuration seems correct. In particular, as advised by the documentation[1], we don't set up ThreadsPerCore in slurm.conf. Are we missing something, or is there a regression or a change in Slurm configuration since the version 23.11? Thank you, Guillaume [1] : https://slurm.schedmd.com/slurm.conf.html#OPT_ThreadsPerCore [View Less]

2 1

FairShare priority questions
by Long, Daniel S. 27 Mar '24

27 Mar '24

Hi, I’m trying to set up multifactor priority on our cluster and am having some trouble getting it to behave the way I’d like. My main issues seem to revolve around FairShare. We have multiple projects on our cluster and multiple users in those projects (and some users are in multiple projects, of course). I would like the FairShare to be based only on the project associated with the job; if user A and user B both submit jobs on project C, the FairShare should be identical. However, it looks … [View More]

3 2

Slurm releases move to a six-month cycle
by Tim Wickberg 26 Mar '24

26 Mar '24

Slurm major releases are moving to a six month release cycle. This change starts with the upcoming Slurm 24.05 release this May. Slurm 24.11 will follow in November 2024. Major releases then continue every May and November in 2025 and beyond. There are two main goals of this change: - Faster delivery of newer features and functionality for customers. - "Predictable" release timing, especially for those sites that would prefer to upgrade during an annual system maintenance window. SchedMD … [View More]

1 0

controller backup slurmctld error while takeover
by Miriam Olmi 26 Mar '24

26 Mar '24

Dear all, I am having trouble finalizing the configuration of the backup controller for my slurm cluster. In principle, if no job is running everything seems fine: both the slurmctld services on the primary and the backup controller are running and if I stop the service on the primary controller after 10s more or less (SlurmctldTimeout = 10 sec) the backup controller takes over. Also, if I run the sinfo or squeue command during the 10s of inactivity, the shell stay pending but it … [View More]

2 5

cgroups_exporter for slurm on rhel9 (cgroups-v2)
by Saluja, Prabhjyot 25 Mar '24

25 Mar '24

Hi All, We are currently trying to set up cgroup_exporter <https://github.com/treydock/cgroup_exporter> for slurm. It's been working smoothly with cgroups.v1 and slurm-22.05.7. However, we're facing some challenges with RHEL-9, slurm-23.11.1 and cgroups.v2. The cgroup_exporter isn't capturing the slurm cgroup job information. I'm reaching out to see if any other sites have managed to make this work. If you're using a different exporter that's working for your site, could you please let us … [View More]

2 1

2025

2024

slurm-users March 2024 ----- 2025 ----- April 2025 March 2025 February 2025 January 2025 ----- 2024 ----- December 2024 November 2024 October 2024 September 2024 August 2024 July 2024 June 2024 May 2024 April 2024 March 2024 February 2024 January 2024

slurm-users March 2024