I have below system policies defined in InfoSphere DataStage Operations Console under "Work Load Management(WLM)".
Sometimes, the total number of currently running jobs shoots upto 150 although I have defined maximum running job count as 40 in WLM.
Whenever the currently running job count increases beyond 100, most of the datastage jobs starts showing increased startup time in director log and they took long time to run otherwise if the job concurrency is less than 100 then the same set of jobs run fine with startup time in seconds. Please suggest how to address this issue and how to enforce currently running job should not exceed eg 100 at any point of time. Thanks a lot !
This is working as designed, generally the WLM system is used to control the start of parallel and server jobs. It uses a set of user-defined queues and when a job is started, it is submitted to a designated queue. In the figure above the parallel jobs are in queue named 'MediumPriorityJobs'.
Note that the sequence job is not in the queue to be counted to the total running workloads controlled by the WLM Job Count System Policy.
Source: https://www.ibm.com/support/pages/how-interpret-job-count-maximum-running-jobs-system-policy-ibm-infosphere-information-server-workload-management-wlm
Related
I was just wondering if anyone could explain if all compute resources in a Databricks cluster are shared or if the resources are tied to each worker. For example, if two users were connected to a cluster made up of 2 workers with 4 cores per worker and one user's job required 2 cores and the other's required 6 cores, would they be able to share the 8 total cores or would the full 4 cores from one worker be unavailable during the job that only required 2 cores?
TL;DR; Yes, default behavior is to allow sharing but you're going to have to tightly control the default parallelism with such a small cluster.
Take a look at Job Scheduling for Apache Spark. I'm assuming you are using an "all-purpose" / "interactive" cluster where users are working on notebooks OR you are submitting jobs to an existing, all-purpose cluster and it is NOT a job cluster with multiple spark applications being deployed.
Databricks Runs in FAIR Scheduling Mode by Default
Under fair sharing, Spark assigns tasks between jobs in a “round robin” fashion, so that all jobs get a roughly equal share of cluster resources. This means that short jobs submitted while a long job is running can start receiving resources right away and still get good response times, without waiting for the long job to finish. This mode is best for multi-user settings.
By default, all queries started in a notebook run in the same fair scheduling pool
The Apache Spark scheduler in Azure Databricks automatically preempts tasks to enforce fair sharing.
Apache Spark Defaults to FIFO
By default, Spark’s scheduler runs jobs in FIFO fashion. Each job is divided into “stages” (e.g. map and reduce phases), and the first job gets priority on all available resources while its stages have tasks to launch, then the second job gets priority, etc. If the jobs at the head of the queue don’t need to use the whole cluster, later jobs can start to run right away, but if the jobs at the head of the queue are large, then later jobs may be delayed significantly.
Keep in mind the word "job" is specific Spark term that represents an action being taken that launches one or more stages and tasks. See What is the concept of application, job, stage and task in spark?.
So in your example you have...
2 Workers with 4 cores each == 8 cores == 8 tasks can be handled in parallel
One application (App A) that has a job that launches a stage with only 2 tasks.
One application (App B) that has a job that launches a stage with 6 tasks.
In this case, YES, you will be able to share the resources of the cluster. However, the devil is in the default behaviors. If you're reading from many files, performing a join, aggregating, etc, you're going to run into the fact that Spark is going to partition your data into chunks that can be acted on in parallel (see configuration like spark.default.parallelism).
So, in a more realistic example, you're going to have...
2 Workers with 4 cores each == 8 cores == 8 tasks can be handled in parallel
One application (App A) that has a job that launches a stage with 200 tasks.
One application (App B) that has a job that launches three stage with 8, 200, and 1 tasks respectively.
In a scenario like this FIFO scheduling, as is the default, will result in one of these applications blocking the other since the number of executors is completely overwhelmed by the number of tasks in just one stage.
In a FAIR scheduling mode, there will still be some blocking since the number of executors is small but some work will be done on each job since FAIR scheduling does a round-robin at the task level.
In Apache Spark, you have tighter control by creating different pools of the resources and submitting apps only to those pools where they have "isolated" resources. The "better" way of doing this is with Databricks Job clusters that have isolated compute dedicated to the application being ran.
I am running load test of 24 hours using Jmeter in Azure Kubernetes service. I am using Throughput shaping timer in my jmx file. No listener is added as part of jmx file.
My test stopped abruptly after 6 or 7 hrs.
jmeter-server.log file under Jmeter slave pod is giving warning --> WARN k.a.j.t.VariableThroughputTimer: No free threads left in worker pool.
Below is snapshot from jmeter-server.log file.
Using Jmeter version - 5.2.1 and Kubernetes version - 1.19.6
I checked, Jmeter pods for master and slaves are continously running(no restart happened) in AKS.
I provided 2GB memory to Jmeter slave pod still load test is stopped abruptly.
I am using log analytics workspace for logging. Checked ContainerLog table not getting error.
Snapshot of JMX file.
Using following elements -> Thread Group, Throughput Controller, Http request Sampler and Throughput Shaping Timer
Please suggest for same.
It looks like your Schedule Feedback Function configuration is wrong in its last parameter
The warning means that the Throughput Shaping Timer attempts to increase the number of threads to reach/maintain the desired concurrency but it doesn't have enough threads in order to do this.
So either increase this Spare threads ration to be closer to 1 if you're using a float value for percentage or increment the absolute value in order to match the number of threads.
Quote from documentation:
Example function call: ${__tstFeedback(tst-name,1,100,10)} , where "tst-name" is name of Throughput Shaping Timer to integrate with, 1 and 100 are starting threads and max allowed threads, 10 is how many spare threads to keep in thread pool. If spare threads parameter is a float value <1, then it is interpreted as a ratio relative to the current estimate of threads needed. If above 1, spare threads is interpreted as an absolute count.
More information: Using JMeter’s Throughput Shaping Timer Plugin
However it doesn't explain the premature termination of the test so ensure that there are no errors in jmeter/k8s logs, one of the possible reasons is that JMeter process is being terminated by OOMKiller
I'm working on a project where we need to execute a lot of jobs (say 60000 jobs) each time in HPC cluster.
From HPC documentation, i noticed HPC has 2 mode
- Queued mode: tart jobs in queue order, and attempt to allocate the maximum requested resources to running jobs.
- Balanced mode: Attempt to start all incoming jobs as soon as possible at their minimum resource requirements
https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/powershell/high-performance-computing/understanding-policy-configuration?view=hpc16-ps
But i'm not sure about tolerance of this balance mode in HPC. Does it can scale like other queue service like SQS in AWS or Queue Storage in Azure?
Queue mode and balance mode are referring to the scheduling policy. There is no real queue included.
Basically, in Queue mode, your jobs run in a FIFO manner. If the next job needs more cores then currently available, it waits despite the fact that there are available resources. While in Balance mode, HPC Pack tries to run as many jobs as possible at the same time and makes the best effort to ensure they use the same amount of resources., to maximize the resource usage.
Both two policies will not effect scale target of the cluster.
Is it possible to change the already queued jobs in windows windows hpc 2012?
I need to move some files from the head node before running another queued job to free space for that job.
I found this statement in Microsoft TechNet:
The order of the job queue is based on job priority level and submit time. Jobs with higher priority levels run before lower priority jobs. The job submit time determines the order within each priority level.
So, as my already queued jobs all are of "Normal" priority, I can set the priority of my move job higher than "Normal" such as "Highest" to get the job done.
I have few questions about running tasks in parallel in Azure Batch. Per the official documentation, "Azure Batch allows you to set maximum tasks per node up to four times (4x) the number of node cores."
Is there a setup other than specifying the max tasks per node when creating a pool, that needs to be done (to the code) to be able to run parallel tasks with batch?
So if I am understanding this correctly, if I have a Standard_D1_v2 machine with 1 core, I can run up to 4 concurrent tasks running in parallel in it. Is that right? If yes, I ran some tests and I am quite not sure about the behavior that I got. In a pool of D1_v2 machines set up to run 1 task per node, I get about 16 min for my job execution time. Then, using the same applications and same parameters with the only change being a new pool with same setup, also D1_v2, except running 4 tasks per node, I still get a job execution time of about 15 min. There wasn't any improvement in the job execution time for running tasks in parallel. What could be happening? What am I missing here?
I ran a test with a pool of D3_v2 machines with 4 cores, set up to run 2 tasks per core for a total of 8 tasks per node, and another test with a pool (same number of machines as previous one) of D2_v2 machines with 2 cores, set up to run 2 tasks per core for a total of 4 parallel tasks per node. The run time/ job execution time for both these tests were the same. Isn't there supposed to be an improvement considering that 8 tasks are running per node in the first test versus 4 tasks per node in the second test? If yes, what could be a reason why I'm not getting this improvement?
No. Although you may want to look into the task scheduling policy, compute node fill type to control how your tasks are distributed amongst nodes in your pool.
How many tasks are in your job? Are your tasks compute-bound? If so, you won't see any improvement (perhaps even end-to-end performance degradation).
Batch merely schedules the tasks concurrently on the node. If the command/process that you're running utilizes all of the cores on the machine and is compute-bound, you won't see an improvement. You should double check your tasks start and end times within the job and the node execution info to see if they are actually being scheduled concurrently on the same node.