[slurm-users] tie a reservation to a QoS?

[Kurt H Maier]

On Mon, Oct 28, 2019 at 06:40:48PM +0000, Tina Friedrich wrote:
> That's fine and all sounds nice but doesn't precisely help me solve my 
> problem - which is how to ensure that people can't access both 
> scheduling priority and a reservation at the same time. I'm not going to 
> be able to change our terms for co-investment on the grounds of can't 
> figure out how to set that up.

This sounds more like a policy problem and less like a technological
one.  If you've got bad-faith users, no amount of programming is going
to fix that.  On the flip side, if you don't want them to have both
reserved nodes and higher QoS, why did you tell them they could have
both?

khm