Housing fine-tune jobs need whole nodes without noisy neighbors. What Slurm administration action fits?
Select an answer to reveal the explanation.
Short Explanation
Housing fine-tunes want the whole apartment—Slurm exclusive nodes, no noisy neighbors. Oversubscribe-everything is the opposite. Turning off accounting or CPU-only pinning misses the multi-GPU need.
Full Explanation
Configuring Slurm exclusive node allocations for municipal multi-GPU fine-tuning gives housing jobs whole nodes without noisy neighbors. Exclusive allocation prevents unrelated city jobs from sharing CPUs/GPUs/memory bandwidth on the same node, which matters for multi-GPU fine-tunes sensitive to contention. Civic training that needs “the whole apartment” uses exclusivity (or equivalent whole-node job requests) rather than aggressive oversubscribe.
Oversubscribing every GPU to dozens of unrelated city jobs fails by concept because oversubscribe maximizes noisy-neighbor effects the stem seeks to avoid. Disabling job accounting so exclusivity cannot be audited fails because accounting is how municipal admins prove who used exclusive nodes and does not create exclusivity by being turned off. Pinning training only to single CPU cores with no GPUs fails because it denies the multi-GPU fine-tune requirement entirely.
Exam caveat: exclusivity can be expressed via exclusive job flags, node-level policies, or partitions reserved for whole-node work—know the mechanism your cluster uses. Exclusivity improves isolation but reduces packing efficiency; use it where multi-GPU fine-tunes justify the cost, not for every tiny job. Still enforce QOS/time limits so exclusive jobs cannot warehouse nodes indefinitely.
Operational check: place housing fine-tune jobs in a partition or QoS that grants exclusive node access, submit a multi-GPU job and a concurrent probe job to prove the probe cannot land on the same node, monitor GPU utilization without alien processes, and review accounting for exclusive-node usage before wider adoption.