IMNSHO: SLURM, Torque, and N1GE are all fine products. They work
well in production environments, both small and large. They all have
default trivial FIFO schedulers but can also be used with more
complex schedulers (e.g., Maui/Moab).
FWIW: I tend to like SLURM simply out of personal preference; that's
what I use on my Cisco development and testing clusters. I'll echo
Jeff P's sentiments that the SLURM developers are very responsive to
questions and fixing problems.
On Oct 22, 2007, at 2:24 PM, Jeff Pummill wrote:
> SLURM was really easy to build and install, plus it's a project of
> LLNL and I love stuff that the Nat'l Labs architect.
> The SLURM message board is also very active and quick to respond to
> questions and problems.
> Jeff F. Pummill
> Bill Johnstone wrote:
>> Hello All. We are starting to need resource/scheduling management
>> for our small cluster, and I was wondering if any of you could
>> provide comments on what you think about Torque vs. SLURM? On the
>> basis of the appearance of active development as well as the
>> documentation, SLURM seems to be superior, but can anyone shed
>> light on how they compare in use? I realize the truth in the stock
>> answer of "it depends on what you need/want," but as of yet we are
>> not experienced enough with this kind of thing to have a set of
>> firm requirements. At this point, we can probably adapt our
>> workflow/usage a little bit to accomodate the way the resource
>> manager works. And of course we'll be using OpenMPI with whatever
>> resource manager we go with. Anyway, enough from me -- I'm looking
>> to hear other's experiences and viewpoints. Thanks for any input!
>> __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!?
>> Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
>> _______________________________________________ users mailing list
>> users_at_[hidden] http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/users
> users mailing list