[torquedev] Torque Semantics
glen.beane at gmail.com
Tue Jun 15 06:35:20 MDT 2010
2010/6/15 "Mgr. Šimon Tóth" <SimonT at mail.muni.cz>:
>> > For example requests like -l mem=1G are ignored during
>> > the scheduling process, but enforced on the node.
>> I can't help but think whether the effort on bringing
>> pbs_sched up to date with these sorts of things would
>> be better spent on bringing in and maintaining Maui as
>> the default scheduler instead; especially as I believe
>> it handles this already.
> This was not about improving pbs_sched and making it up to date with
> Maui features (that's actually a very stupid idea). This was about
> documenting the Torques behaviour (server + qrun). I think that the
> previous threads have proven that this behaviour is not well documented
> an in some cases even ambiguous.
> I haven't used Maui, but I'm pretty sure that if Maui would be the
> Torques scheduler we would be using Slurm right now instead of Torque.
> Major reason being that Maui is designed around the limitation that each
> server can have only one scheduler.
> Plus having Maui as a default scheduler would eliminate any development
> effort in Torque. Maui is using Torque server just as job storage.
There is plenty of development work in torque that does not depend on
pbs_sched (better job arrays coming out in 2.5.0 for example).
I'm pretty sure you are the only person in the world using TORQUE
pbs_sched for a non-trivial single FIFO scheduler configuration. Would
you please share more details of your configuration so other
developers have an idea where you're coming from?
I think you have a lot of patches that should get merged back
upstream, but it would be helpful if everyone knew where you're coming
More information about the torquedev