[slurm-users] Fairshare: Penalising unused memory rather than used memory?

[Diego Zuccato]

IIUC Loris is looking for a method to do that automatically.
Since there is a "used memory" metric, a corresponding "wasted memory" 
(or "wasted CPU") one with corresponding weights in priority 
calculations could be useful.

Diego

Il 11/10/2023 09:54, Williams, Gareth (IM&T, Black Mountain) ha scritto:
> Hi Loris, You could add them to a naughty list (please use a better 
> term...) and apply a fixed commensurate priority penalty.  That is 
> simple (and can apply to a range of unpreferred behaviour) and provides 
> a clear motivation to change. Could be done with QOS unless you already 
> use that in a conflicting way.
> 
> Gareth
> 
> Get Outlook for Android <https://aka.ms/ghei36>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> *From:* slurm-users <slurm-users-bounces at lists.schedmd.com> on behalf of 
> Loris Bennett <loris.bennett at fu-berlin.de>
> *Sent:* Wednesday, October 11, 2023 5:26:38 PM
> *To:* Slurm Users Mailing List <slurm-users at lists.schedmd.com>
> *Subject:* [slurm-users] Fairshare: Penalising unused memory rather than 
> used memory?
> Hi,
> 
> We have an increasing number of users who are unable (or unwilling) to
> estimate their memory requirements accurately.  We include memory in our
> calculation of fairshare usage and thus penalise everyone who requests
> large amounts of memory, whether it is needed or not.
> 
> Therefore I would be interested in knowing whether one can take into
> account the *requested but unused memory* when calculating usage.  Is
> this possible?
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Loris
> 
> -- 
> Dr. Loris Bennett (Herr/Mr)
> ZEDAT, Freie Universität Berlin
> 

-- 
Diego Zuccato
DIFA - Dip. di Fisica e Astronomia
Servizi Informatici
Alma Mater Studiorum - Università di Bologna
V.le Berti-Pichat 6/2 - 40127 Bologna - Italy
tel.: +39 051 20 95786