[slurm-users] GrpMEMRunMins equivalent?

[Bjørn-Helge Mevik]

Corey Keasling <corey.keasling at jila.colorado.edu> writes:

> And thank you also for the solution, I hadn't tried that
> syntax. Interesting that GrpCPURunMins works while GrpMemRunMins does
> not.

Historic reasons: GrpCPURunMins has been there a long time.  Instead of
adding GrpMemRunMins, GrpGPURunMins, etc. for all the TRES on can
specify, they chose to add GrpTRESRunMins instead.

> I also noticed that if the limit is specified as GrpTRESRunMins=Memory=1000,Cpu=2000 only the CPU portion takes effect -- 
> the Memory= portion is silently dropped.  And, specifying Memory=1000
> by itself results in 'Unknown option: grptresrunmins=memory=1000'.
> Only Mem= works, and it works in both instances.

My bad.  Mem is correct, Memory is my false memory. :)

> In fact, it looks
> like any unknown option is silently ignored so long as at least one
> correctly named TRES appears in the list.

Interesting to know!

-- 
Cheers,
Bjørn-Helge Mevik, dr. scient,
Department for Research Computing, University of Oslo
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 832 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.schedmd.com/pipermail/slurm-users/attachments/20200606/beb193df/attachment-0001.sig>