<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1" http-equiv="Content-Type">
<title></title>
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
I think Ben is right, in this particular instance, Swift submitted all
26 jobs, and Falkon dispatched 24 of them, and held 2 of them in the
wait queue. Throttling was not the issue here. At first glance, I
would say that although you asked for 30 nodes at the beining, you
might have lost some due to idle time limit being reached, and hence
when you started the 26 jobs, you only had 24 executors ready. Can you
send me these two logs: service/logs/GenericPortalWS_perf_per_sec.log,
and service/logs/GenericPortalWS_taskPerf.log and I will try to
superimpose the # of busy and free executors on top of the graph you
sent out showing the per task information.<br>
<br>
Ioan<br>
<br>
Ben Clifford wrote:
<blockquote
cite="mid:Pine.LNX.4.64.0706211626190.1452@dildano.hawaga.org.uk"
type="cite">
<pre wrap="">My interpretation of the graph is:
The two jobs that didn't get run till later (the 'spare' jobs) are
submitted into falkon at approx t=0, along with the 24 'run straight away'
jobs.
Swift isn't holding them back.
Falkon indicates that it is aware of them from approx time = 0 but doesn't
run them until t=500000.
That means, I think, that they're getting into Falkons queue right at the
start, and its something happening with how Falkon places them onto worker
nodes that isn't right here.
At least that's my first impression.
On Thu, 21 Jun 2007, Tiberiu Stef-Praun wrote:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">No
I'm saying that swift throttle value will allow me to make full use of
all the nodes that Falkon makes available for me. I know that I had 26
jobs to be run, and I requested (and had) 30 nodes in the cluster.
Somehow only 24 jobs run in the first time, so I'm going to push up
the throttle value in Swift
Tibi
On 6/21/07, Ben Clifford <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:benc@hawaga.org.uk"><benc@hawaga.org.uk></a> wrote:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">
On Thu, 21 Jun 2007, Tiberiu Stef-Praun wrote:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">No
My chart shows that if I had two more machines during the first stage
run (the first 26 jobs), I would have avoided a long wait (50000 ms ,
or about 9 minutes) for the last two jobs from the first batch to
finish.
This is why I need to redo the Econ run, with a different throttle
value for Swift.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="">So you are saying that changing the 'throttle value for swift' will
allocate more machines for you?
--
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="">
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap=""><!---->
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
<pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">--
============================================
Ioan Raicu
Ph.D. Student
============================================
Distributed Systems Laboratory
Computer Science Department
University of Chicago
1100 E. 58th Street, Ryerson Hall
Chicago, IL 60637
============================================
Email: <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:iraicu@cs.uchicago.edu">iraicu@cs.uchicago.edu</a>
Web: <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.cs.uchicago.edu/~iraicu">http://www.cs.uchicago.edu/~iraicu</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://dsl.cs.uchicago.edu/">http://dsl.cs.uchicago.edu/</a>
============================================
============================================
</pre>
</body>
</html>