Best practices for job submission: Difference between revisions

When submitting a job to one of the clusters, it's important to choose appropriate values for various parameters in order to ensure that your job doesn't waste resources or create problems for other users and yourself. This will ensure your job starts more quickly and that it is likely to finish correctly, producing the output you need to move your research forward. As you might expect, the more resources - time, CPU cores, memory, GPUs - that your job asks for, the more difficult it will be for the scheduler to find these resources and so the longer your job will wait in queue.  

For your first jobs on the cluster, it's understandably difficult to estimate how much time or memory may be needed for your job to carry out a particular simulation or analysis. The best approach in this case is to begin by submitting a few relatively small jobs, asking for a fairly standard amount of memory (<tt>#SBATCH --mem-per-cpu=2G</tt>) and time, for example one or two hours. Ideally you should already know what the answer will be in these test jobs, allowing you to verify that the software is running correctly on the cluster. If the job ends before the computation finished, you can increase the duration by doubling it until the job's duration is sufficient. A similar method can be applied for the memory: if your job ends with a message about an "OOM event" this means it ran out of memory (OOM), so try doubling the memory you've requested and see if this is enough. By means of these test jobs, you should gain some familiarity with how long certain analyses require on the cluster and how much memory is needed, so that for more realistic jobs you'll be able to make an intelligent estimate.  

=Job duration=

For jobs which are not tests, the duration should be at least one hour. If your computation requires less than an hour, you should consider using tools like [[GLOST]], [[META:_A_package_for_job_farming | META]] or [[GNU Parallel]] to regroup several of your computations into a single Slurm job with a duration of at least an hour. Hundreds or thousands of very short jobs place undue stress on the scheduler.

It is equally important that your estimate of the job duration be relatively accurate: asking for five days when the computation in reality finishes after just sixteen hours leads to your job spending much more time waiting to start than it would had you given a more accurate estimate of the duration. It's natural to leave a certain amount of room for error in the estimate and so to increase the duration by five or ten percent "just in case" but otherwise it's in your interest for your estimate of the job's duration to be as accurate as possible. You can see how long completed jobs took to run using the command  

}}  

in the field <i>Job Wall-clock time</i>.

Longer jobs, such as those with a duration exceeding 48 hours, should consider using [[Points_de_contrôle/en|checkpoints]] if the software permits this. With a checkpoint, the program writes a snapshot of its state to a diskfile and the program can then be restarted from this diskfile, at that precise point in the calculation. In this way, even if there is a power outage or some other interruption of the compute node(s) being used by your job, you won't necessarily lose much work if your program writes a checkpoint file every six or eight hours.

By default your job will get one core on one node and this is the most sensible policy because most software is serial: it can only ever make use of a single core. Asking for more cores and/or nodes will not make the program run any faster because for it to run in parallel the program's source code needs to be modified, in some cases in a very profound manner requiring a substantial investment of developer time. How can you determine if the software you're using can run in parallel? The best approach is to look in the software's documentation for a section on parallel execution: if you can't find anything, this is usually a sign that this program is serial. You can also contact the development team to ask if the software can be run in parallel and if not, to request that such a feature be added in a future version.  

If the program can run in parallel, the next question is how to specify the number of CPU cores that the program should use. The right syntax to use will depend on the particular program: it might be an option to be added as a command line argument like <tt>--nthreads=4</tt>, an environment variable you need to set before calling the program (e.g. <tt>export OMP_NUM_THREADS=4</tt>) or perhaps a line you should add to the program's parameter file. Once you know how to specify the number of CPU cores that the program should use, the next logical question is what number of cores to use? It may be tempting to simply reply, "as many as possible" but this is often not the wisest approach. Just as having too many cooks trying to work together in a small kitchen to prepare a single meal can lead to chaos, so too adding an excessive number of CPU cores can have the perverse effect of slowing down a program. To choose the optimal number of CPU cores, you need to study the software's [[Scalability | scalability]].

A further complication with parallel execution concerns the use of multiple nodes - many of the programming techniques used to allow a program to run in parallel assume the existence of a shared memory environment, i.e. multiple cores can be used but they must all be located on the same node. In this case, the maximum number of cores available on a single node provides a ceiling for the number of cores you can use. Trying to ask for more cores than this or using more than one node will fail because the software you are running does not support <i>distributed memory parallelism</i>. Most software able to run over more than one node uses the [[MPI]] standard, so if the documentation doesn't mention MPI or consistently refers to threading and thread-based parallelism, this likely means you will need to restrict yourself to a single node.

Ultimately, the goal should be to ensure that the CPU efficiency of your jobs is very close to 100%, as measured by the field of this name in the output from the <tt>seff</tt> command; any value of CPU efficiency less than 90% is poor and means that your use of whatever software your job executes needs to be improved.

=Memory consumption=

Much like with the duration of your job, the goal when requesting the memory is to ensure that the amount is sufficient, with a certain margin of error - your <i>Memory Efficiency</i> in the output from the <tt>seff</tt> command should be at least 80% to 85% in most cases. If you plan on using an entire node for your job, it is natural to also use all of its available memory which you can express using the line <tt>#SBATCH --mem=0</tt> in your job submission script. Note however that most of our clusters offer nodes with variable amounts of memory available, so using this approach means your job will likely be assigned a node with less memory. If  your testing has shown that you need to a high-memory node, then you will want to use a line like <tt>#SBATCH --mem=1500G</tt> for example, to request a node with 1500 GB (or 1.46 TB) of memory. There are relatively few of these high-memory nodes so your job will wait much longer to run - make sure your job really needs all this extra memory.