- slurm-users - lists.schedmd.com

Jobs pending with reason "priority" but nodes are idle
by Long, Daniel S. 25 Sep '24

25 Sep '24

Hi, On our cluster we have some jobs that are queued even though there are available nodes to run on. The listed reason is "priority" but that doesn't really make sense to me. Slurm isn't picking another job to run on those nodes; it's just not running anything at all. We do have a quite heterogeneous cluster, but as far as I can tell the queued jobs aren't requesting anything that would preclude them from running on the idle nodes. They are array jobs, if that makes a difference. Thanks for any help you all can provide.

3 6

Max TRES per user and node
by Guillaume COCHARD 25 Sep '24

25 Sep '24

Hello, We are looking for a method to limit the TRES used by each user on a per-node basis. For example, we would like to limit the total memory allocation of jobs from a user to 200G per node. There is MaxTRESperNode (https://slurm.schedmd.com/sacctmgr.html#OPT_MaxTRESPerNode), but unfortunately, this is a per-job limit, not per user. Ideally, we would like to apply this limit on partitions and/or QoS. Does anyone know if this is possible and how to achieve it? Thank you,

4 9

SLURM Telegraf Plugin
by Pablo Collado Soto 25 Sep '24

25 Sep '24

Hi all, I recently wrote an SLURM input plugin [0] for Telegraf [1]. I just wanted to let the community know so that you can use it if you'd find that useful. Maybe its existence can also be included in the documentation somewhere? Anyway, thanks a ton for your time, Pablo Collado Soto References: 0: https://github.com/influxdata/telegraf/tree/master/plugins/inputs/slurm 1: https://www.influxdata.com/time-series-platform/telegraf/ + -------------------------------------- + | Never let your sense of morals prevent | | you from doing what is right. | | -- Salvor Hardin, "Foundation" | + -------------------------------------- +

2 1

Setting up fairshare accounting
by tluchko 24 Sep '24

24 Sep '24

Hello, We have a new cluster and I'm trying to setup fairshare accounting. I'm trying to track CPU, MEM and GPU. It seems that billing for individual jobs is correct, but billing isn't being accumulated (TRESRunMin is always 0). In my slurm.conf, I think the relevant lines are AccountingStorageType=accounting_storage/slurmdbd AccountingStorageTRES=gres/gpu PriorityFlags=MAX_TRES PartitionName=gpu Nodes=node[1-7] MaxCPUsPerNode=384 MaxTime=7-0:00:00 State=UP TRESBillingWeights="CPU=1.0,MEM=0.125G,GRES/gpu=9.6" PartitionName=cpu Nodes=node[1-7] MaxCPUsPerNode=182 MaxTime=7-0:00:00 State=UP TRESBillingWeights="CPU=1.0,MEM=0.125G,GRES/gpu=9.6" I currently have one recently finished job and one running job. sacct gives $ sacct --format=JobID,JobName,ReqTRES%50,AllocTRES%50,TRESUsageInAve%50,TRESUsageInMax%50 JobID JobName ReqTRES AllocTRES TRESUsageInAve TRESUsageInMax ------------ ---------- -------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------- 154 interacti+ billing=9,cpu=1,gres/gpu=1,mem=1G,node=1 billing=9,cpu=2,gres/gpu=1,mem=2G,node=1 154.interac+ interacti+ cpu=2,gres/gpu=1,mem=2G,node=1 cpu=00:00:00,energy=0,fs/disk=2480503,mem=3M,page+ cpu=00:00:00,energy=0,fs/disk=2480503,mem=3M,page+ 155 interacti+ billing=9,cpu=1,gres/gpu=1,mem=1G,node=1 billing=9,cpu=2,gres/gpu=1,mem=2G,node=1155.interac+ interacti+ cpu=2,gres/gpu=1,mem=2G,node=1 billing=9 seems correct to me, since I have 1 GPU allocated, which has the largest score of 9.6. However, sshare doesn't show anything in TRESRunMins sshare --format=Account,User,RawShares,FairShare,RawUsage,EffectvUsage,TRESRunMins%110 Account User RawShares FairShare RawUsage EffectvUsage TRESRunMins -------------------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ----------- ------------- -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- root 21589714 1.000000 cpu=0,mem=0,energy=0,node=0,billing=0,fs/disk=0,vmem=0,pages=0,gres/gpu=0,gres/gpumem=0,gres/gpuutil=0 abrol_group 2000 0 0.000000 cpu=0,mem=0,energy=0,node=0,billing=0,fs/disk=0,vmem=0,pages=0,gres/gpu=0,gres/gpumem=0,gres/gpuutil=0 luchko_group 2000 21589714 1.000000 cpu=0,mem=0,energy=0,node=0,billing=0,fs/disk=0,vmem=0,pages=0,gres/gpu=0,gres/gpumem=0,gres/gpuutil=0 luchko_group tluchko 1 0.333333 21589714 1.000000 cpu=0,mem=0,energy=0,node=0,billing=0,fs/disk=0,vmem=0,pages=0,gres/gpu=0,gres/gpumem=0,gres/gpuutil=0 Why is TRESRunMin all 0 but RawUsage is not for tluchko? I have checked and slurmdbd is running. Thank you, Tyler Sent with [Proton Mail](https://proton.me/) secure email.

1 2

SLUG'24 presentation slides?
by Kilian Cavalotti 23 Sep '24

23 Sep '24

Hi SchedMD, I'm sure they will eventually, but do you know when the slides of the SLUG'24 presentation will be available online at https://slurm.schedmd.com/publications.html, like previous editions'? Thanks! -- Kilian

1 0

what updates NODEADDR
by Jakub Szarlat 21 Sep '24

21 Sep '24

Hi I'm using dynamic nodes with "slurmd -Z" with slurm 23.11.1. Firstly I find that when you do "scontrol show node" it shows the NODEADDR as ip rather than the NODENAME. Because I'm playing around with running this in containers on docker swarm I find this ip can be wrong. I can force it with scontrol update however after a while something updates it to something else again. Does anybody know if this is done by slurmd or slurmctld or something else? How can I stop this from happening? How can I get the node to register with the hostname rather than ip? cheers, Jakub

2 1

SLURM GRES reservation not working properly on 24.05.1
by Minulakshmi S 20 Sep '24

20 Sep '24

Hello, *Issue 1:* I am using slurm version 24.05.1 , my slurmd has a single node where I connect multiple gres by enabling the overscribe feature. I am able to use the advance reservation of gres only using *gres** name* (tres=gres/gpu:*SYSTEM12*). i.e while in reservation period , if other users submits job with SYSTEM12 , then slurm places this job in queue *user1@host$ srun --gres=gpu:SYSTEM12:1 hostname* *srun: job 333 queued and waiting for resources * but when other users just submit a job without any system name , slurm jobs goes through on that gres immediately even though it is reserved. *user1@host$ srun --gres=gpu:1 hostname * *mylinux.wbi.com <http://mylinux.wbi.com> * Also I can see GresUsed in busy mode using "*scontrol show node -d*" , this means the job is running on Gres/GPU and not on cpu etc. Same way , job submission based on Feature "rev1 in my case" is also going through even though it is reserved for other users in multiple partition slurm. *snippet of slurm.conf file* NodeName=cluster01 NodeAddr=cluster Port=6002CPUs=8 Boards=1 SocketsPerBoard=1 CoresPerSocket=8 ThreadsPerCore=2 Feature="rev1" Gres=gpu:SYSTEM12:1 RealMemory=64171 State=IDLE *Issue 2:* while execution , Slurm o/p's some extra prints in the srun output user1@host$ srun --gres=gpu:1 hostname srun: error: extract_net_cred: net_cred not provided srun: error: Malformed RPC of type RESPONSE_NODE_ALIAS_ADDRS(3017) received srun: error: slurm_unpack_received_msg: [[inv1715771615.nxdi.us-aus01.nxp.com]:41242] Header lengths are longer than data received *mylinux.wbi.com <http://mylinux.wbi.com>* Regards, MS

1 0

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 with "NOT_RESPONDING" which leads to slurm not trying to schedule on it. After a while NOT_RESPONDING is removed, but I would like to move it directly from within my fail script if possible so that the node can return to service immediately and not be blocked by "NOT_RESPONDING". Best regards, Xaver

2 3

SlurmDBD errors
by Sajesh Singh 19 Sep '24

19 Sep '24

OS: CentOS 8.5 Slurm: 22.05 Recently upgraded to 22.05. Upgrade was successful, but after a while I started to see the following messages in the slurmdbd.log file: error: We have more time than is possible (9344745+7524000+0)(16868745) > 12362400 for cluster CLUSTERNAME(3434) from 2024-09-18T13:00:00 - 2024-09-18T14:00:00 tres 1 (this may happen if oversubscription of resources is allowed without Gang) We do have partitions with overlapping nodes, but do not have "Suspend,Gang" set as the global PreemptMode mode. It is currently set to requeue. I have also check sacct and there are no runaway jobs listed. Oversubscription is not enabled on any of the queues as well. Do I need to modify my slurm config to address or is this an error condition caused by the upgrade? Thank you, SS

2 2

Change a job from --exclusive to --exclusive=user
by Gerhard Strangar 18 Sep '24

18 Sep '24

Hello, is it possible to change a pending job from --exclusive to --exclusive=user? I tried scontrol update jobid=... oversubscribe=user, but it seems to only accept yes or no. Gerhard

1 0

2024

slurm-users ----- 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