D4Science Infrastructure

Apart from the technicalities behind this request, there is an organisational issue.

It was clarified many times that there is no DM cluster dedicated to AGINFRA+ use cases, the cluster is shared with other communities. If we change the behavior of such a shared cluster, the change will affect all the other communities. A machine with ~100+ cores is not in the current portfolio of AGINFRA / D4Science ;)

If this request is for the creation of a new cluster please clarify the "scope", i.e. how many processes needs this setting. The creation of a cluster has a cost in terms of human time and machines to allocate. It should be discussed at PMB.

You last comment is quite puzzling to me ... "Ideal for us would be if all server of a cluster behave like that, in order to avoid the need to adress a single server inside the cluster." ... this is definitely a non recommended practice ... the cluster might evolve, the develper of an algorithm should not be exposed to the internals of DataMiner and its management of machines.

I agree to discuss this during the next PBM.
I will add this ticket to the WP6 discussion slot.

Good idea to discuss that during PBM. I would like to add a few thoughts for later discussion.

I understand that there are other users on the system, which would be influenced by a change. Therefore, it would be interesting what is the advantage on a joblenght = 4 for them and whether they would be happy with a joblength=1.

I don't understand why the last comment is puzzling for you. 'to adress a single server inside the cluster' is what I want to avoid, here we are exactly on the same page. But in the past CNR mentioned in a ticket that this is possible via REST and a workaround. All I ask for is a solution for us to make a meaningful use of your infrastructure for our use case (since an HPC is not available). Maybe you can provide some ideas until the meeting?

Just to clarify the scope: Allowing a job(model) to use all cores (the more the better) of a server, without beeing disturbed by another job via cueing system (as it is already implemented).
In my understanding the solution to that could be a joblength=1.