[slurm-users] Reset Fair-share tree account values

[Paul Edmon]

Wow, nice find.  I wasn't even aware of that one.  Hopefully they will 
support the ability to reset to other values in the future as that would 
be a handy ability.


-Paul Edmon-


On 7/16/2020 12:56 PM, Sebastian T Smith wrote:
> `sacctmgr` can be used to reset the accrued RawUsage value.  Example 
> usage:
>
> # sacctmgr modify user <user name> where Account=<account name> set 
> RawUsage=0
>
> Review the `sacctmgr` documentation for more 
> details:https://slurm.schedmd.com/sacctmgr.html 
> <https://slurm.schedmd.com/sacctmgr.html>
>
> Best,
>
> Sebastian
>
> --
>
> University of Nevada, Reno <http://www.unr.edu/> 		
> *Sebastian Smith
> *High-Performance Computing Engineer
> Office of Information Technology
> 1664 North Virginia Street
> MS 0291
>
> *work-phone:*775-682-5050 <tel:7756825050>
> ***email:*stsmith at unr.edu <mailto:stsmith at unr.edu>
> *website:*http://rc.unr.edu <http://rc.unr.edu/>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> *From:* slurm-users <slurm-users-bounces at lists.schedmd.com> on behalf 
> of Paul Edmon <pedmon at cfa.harvard.edu>
> *Sent:* Thursday, July 16, 2020 5:49 AM
> *To:* slurm-users at lists.schedmd.com <slurm-users at lists.schedmd.com>
> *Subject:* Re: [slurm-users] Reset Fair-share tree account values
>
> Also as a side, is there an official name for the other fairshare 
> system?  I guess the official documentation calls it Classic 
> Fairshare, like Classic Coke :). I hate to call it old as we use it 
> here and will continue to use it. We have no intention to moving to 
> FairTree because we've only recently gotten our users used to the 
> current system.  FairTree frankly doesn't fit our model and is too 
> complicated to explain for most of our users who have just figured out 
> how the current system works.  So while FairTree is the default the 
> other system is still in wide use and I think still very useful.
>
> -Paul Edmon-
>
> On 7/16/2020 8:42 AM, Paul Edmon wrote:
>>
>> A trick you can use to reset certain users (which I have used before) 
>> is to simply delete them from the slurmdb and then readd them.  At 
>> least under the other fairshare system, which is what our site uses, 
>> that would remove their usage and they would have 0 usage when they 
>> returned.  I'm assuming fairtree works the same way.
>>
>> -Paul Edmon-
>>
>> On 7/16/2020 5:49 AM, Gestió Servidors wrote:
>>>
>>> Hello,
>>>
>>> I will try to explain an scenario that occurs in my SLURM cluster. 
>>> An important number of users (accounts) belongs to students of a 
>>> certain subject. That subject is 6 month duration. When subject end, 
>>> I “reset” user folders, clean all data, reset passwords and, in next 
>>> academic year, I offer same users (accounts) to new students, so 
>>> they have their $HOME cleans and no old data. However, in SLURM, 
>>> what old users could execute modified values we can seen in “sshare 
>>> -l -a”, specifically “RawUsage, NormUsage, EffectvUsage, FairShare, 
>>> LevelFS”. After reading some documents, I “understand” that these 
>>> values are calculated to give more or less priority to a user 
>>> (account) job depending its features, cluster use, total number of 
>>> CPUs, cores, etc... so, when new users take that accounts, that 
>>> values should be reset as a new user in the cluster... but I think 
>>> that new users are dragging from the past.
>>>
>>> My slurm.conf contains these parameters:
>>>
>>> PriorityType=priority/multifactor
>>>
>>> PriorityDecayHalfLife=7-0
>>>
>>> PriorityCalcPeriod=5
>>>
>>> PriorityUsageResetPeriod=QUARTERLY
>>>
>>> PriorityFavorSmall=NO
>>>
>>> PriorityMaxAge=7-0
>>>
>>> PriorityWeightAge=10000
>>>
>>> PriorityWeightFairshare=1000000
>>>
>>> PriorityWeightJobSize=1000
>>>
>>> PriorityWeightPartition=1000
>>>
>>> PriorityWeightQOS=0
>>>
>>> As you can see, “PriorityUsageResetPeriod” is configured as 
>>> QUARTERLY, so after reading some documents and examples, I “think” 
>>> that fair-share tree, priorities and user assigned job priority is 
>>> “reset” and turned to initial values... Am I wrong or am I in the 
>>> correct way?
>>>
>>> But, either way, I would like to reset that values only for some 
>>> users (accounts), not for all SLURM users/accounts. Is it possible?
>>>
>>> Thanks.
>>>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.schedmd.com/pipermail/slurm-users/attachments/20200716/c046caf7/attachment-0001.htm>