<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" standalone="yes"?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>Slurm on Hunter Wigelsworth</title><link>https://wiggels.dev/tags/slurm/</link><description>Recent content in Slurm on Hunter Wigelsworth</description><generator>Hugo</generator><language>en-us</language><lastBuildDate>Mon, 15 Jun 2026 00:00:00 +0000</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://wiggels.dev/tags/slurm/index.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/><item><title>Armada vs SLURM: Two Schedulers, Two Theories of Who Owns the Cluster</title><link>https://wiggels.dev/posts/armada-vs-slurm-who-owns-the-cluster/</link><pubDate>Mon, 15 Jun 2026 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate><guid>https://wiggels.dev/posts/armada-vs-slurm-who-owns-the-cluster/</guid><description>&lt;p&gt;There&amp;rsquo;s a question hiding inside every batch scheduler, and almost nobody asks it out loud: who owns the cluster?&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;If the answer is &amp;ldquo;we do, top to bottom, and nobody else gets to touch it,&amp;rdquo; you&amp;rsquo;re in SLURM country. If the answer is &amp;ldquo;the platform team owns the clusters, and we&amp;rsquo;re just tenants who need to run jobs somewhere,&amp;rdquo; you&amp;rsquo;re in Armada country. Both schedulers will cheerfully run your workload. Both will work fine until they don&amp;rsquo;t. The thing that determines which one is right for you has almost nothing to do with features and almost everything to do with that question.&lt;/p&gt;</description></item></channel></rss>