JiscMail Logo
Email discussion lists for the UK Education and Research communities

Help for LCG-ROLLOUT Archives


LCG-ROLLOUT Archives

LCG-ROLLOUT Archives


LCG-ROLLOUT@JISCMAIL.AC.UK


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

LCG-ROLLOUT Home

LCG-ROLLOUT Home

LCG-ROLLOUT  July 2009

LCG-ROLLOUT July 2009

Options

Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password

Subject:

Re: New CE info publication

From:

"Burke, S (Stephen)" <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

LHC Computer Grid - Rollout <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

Thu, 9 Jul 2009 14:10:07 +0100

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (47 lines)

LHC Computer Grid - Rollout 
> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Burke, S (Stephen)
said:
> To start with, there's the new GlueHostProcessorOtherDescription
attribute,

OK, second thing. There should now be a CECapability published as e.g.

GlueCECapability: CPUScalingReferenceSI00=1250

One thing to note is that there's a typo in the release notes, in some
places it calls it CPUScalingFactorSI00 and some sites are publishing
that. ScalingReference is correct.

  Secondly there seems to be a bit of confusion about exactly what this
means, so I'll try to explain further ... the existing SI00 attribute
(GlueHostBenchmarkSI00) is the average benchmark rating for the CPUs in
the SubCluster. However, some sites use the PBS facility to normalise
the cpu time limits for the queues to a standardised SI00 reference,
which may be quite different to the actual power of the CPUs, e.g. maybe
your reference CPU is for an SI00 of 100 whereas your actual CPUs are
much more powerful. Since we now want to measure the real installed CPU
power at sites that could underestimate the capacity at such a site by a
large factor. The new scheme splits the attribute in two. The old
BenchmarkSI00 should become the actual (average) rating, so it can be
used to measure the installed capacity. The CPUScalingReferenceSI00 is
the value used in the batch system, which may or may not be the same.
APEL will be changed to use that value, since the CPU time for jobs as
reported by PBS is also scaled to the reference CPU power.

  As a second point, if sites don't use the batch system scaling and
just apply the time limits directly to whatever CPU the job lands on,
the ScalingReference should be the *least* powerful CPU in the system.
That means that when you estimate how long the job will run the actual
run time may be faster but not slower, so the job should always fit
inside the time limit.

  As a concrete example, say I know that with an SI00 of 2000 my job
will take 10 hours. Then I should be able to estimate my CPU time on any
CE as 10*60*2000/CPUScalingReferenceSI00 and ask for a CE with a
MaxCPUTime bigger than that (plus some safety margin) and be confident
that my job won't be killed for exceeding the CPU time limit.

Stephen
-- 
Scanned by iCritical.

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

JiscMail Tools


RSS Feeds and Sharing


Advanced Options


Archives

March 2024
November 2023
June 2023
May 2023
April 2023
March 2023
February 2023
September 2022
June 2022
May 2022
April 2022
February 2022
December 2021
November 2021
October 2021
September 2021
July 2021
June 2021
May 2021
February 2021
January 2021
November 2020
September 2020
August 2020
July 2020
June 2020
May 2020
April 2020
March 2020
February 2020
January 2020
November 2019
October 2019
September 2019
August 2019
July 2019
June 2019
May 2019
March 2019
February 2019
January 2019
December 2018
November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
August 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
February 2018
January 2018
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
2006
2005
2004
2003


JiscMail is a Jisc service.

View our service policies at https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/policyandsecurity/ and Jisc's privacy policy at https://www.jisc.ac.uk/website/privacy-notice

For help and support help@jisc.ac.uk

Secured by F-Secure Anti-Virus CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager