When a p-slot with a Consumption Policy is matched then its match-cost is the _change_ in the SlotWeight value, from before the match to after. This means that a match is _only charged for the portion of the p-slot that it actually used_ (as measured by the SlotWeight expression), and so p-slots with large SlotWeight values can generally be used by accounting groups with smaller quotas (and likewise by submitters having smaller fairshare values).
+{subsubsection: trade-offs}
+One implication of negotiator splitting (Consumption Policies) is that the negotiator is responsible for matching all requests. In an large-scale pool, this may make the negotiation cycle the rate-limiter for resource allocation. A pool can support multiple schedulers, so scheduler splitting (CLAIM_PARTITIONABLE_LEFTOVERS) can scale by increasing the number of schedulers running on the pool.
+
{section: Consumption Policies and Accounting}
As was mentioned above, the match cost for a job against a slot with a Consumption Policy is the _change_ in the SlotWeight value from before the match to after. It is this match cost value that is added to the corresponding submitter's usage in the HTCondor accountant. A useful way to think about accounting with Consumption Policies is that the standard role of SlotWeight is replaced with _change_ in SlotWeight.
