[torqueusers] Re: qsub problem in 2.3.2?

[Tom Rudwick]

Thanks Matthew!

We'll have to try to figure out why we are seeing that problem. Maybe
there is something wrong with our build/installation process.

Thanks,
Tom


Matthew Britt wrote:
> We're not running 2.3.2 in production yet, but my quick test of 2.3.2 
> (and your example) didn't show any problems (I received the requested 
> memory allocation).
> 
>  - matt
> 
> On Aug 9, 2008, at 8:36 PM, Tom Rudwick wrote:
> 
>>
>> Hello? (tap tap)
>> I guess nobody is running 2.3.x
>> Probably a wise decision.
>>
>> Tom
>>
>>
>> Tom Rudwick wrote:
>>> Is it just us, or did this break in 2.3.2?
>>> qsub -l mem=5gb test
>>> When we do this with 2.3.1, we get a job with 5gb memory allocation.
>>> When we do this with 2.3.2, we get a job with the server default 
>>> memory allocation.
>>> Thanks,
>>> Tom
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> torqueusers mailing list
>> torqueusers at supercluster.org
>> http://www.supercluster.org/mailman/listinfo/torqueusers
>>
>>
>