Closed StHagel closed 1 month ago
If you execute hq alloc add --name <foo>
and then all allocations from this queue would be named <foo>
, would that be OK for you? Or should it be e.g. <foo>-1
, <foo>-2
etc.?
Would it also be possible to add a flag to hq submit
instead of hq alloc
?
You can already state the name of a job (hq submit --name <foo>
), but this has nothing to do with allocations. Note that HQ jobs are completely separated from allocations, and therefore any attribute of a job cannot affect attributes of Slurm/PBS allocations.
Right, makes sense.
Then having a --name
flag available for hq alloc
seems reasonable. Would the index in the name indicate a worker?
The index would indicate the order of the allocation created in the given allocation queue. So the first allocation created by HQ would get <foo>-1
, the second one would get <foo>-2
, etc. In theory, we could also let the allocator name the workers, currently they get their name from the hostname of the node on which they are spawned.
(The flag is already available btw, it just isn't propagated to the Slurm allocation name, which is what we could change).
I guess the solution with the index is better than without.
Oops, according to our documentation, the --name
parameter should already have been used to name the allocations, so this was actually a bug. Fixed by https://github.com/It4innovations/hyperqueue/pull/710.
Currently, all workers are just named
hq-alloc
in slurm, when viewing them insqueue
. It would be nice to be able to give the workers custom names. In slurm this can be done via the--job-name='My job name'
flag.