[Beowulf] openMosix ending
Many of your questions may have already been answered in earlier discussions or in the FAQ. The search results page will indicate current discussions as well as past list serves, articles, and papers.
Michael Will mwill at penguincomputing.comTue Jul 17 12:21:26 PDT 2007
- Previous message: [Beowulf] openMosix ending
- Next message: [Beowulf] openMosix ending
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
IMHO you don't need dynamic migration for embarassingly parallel applications as they can just be launched on any available compute node directly and run there to completion. A simple queue system / scheduler like torque or similar will be enough to make sure to not run more than cpus are available on a give node at the same time in order to get best throughput. Just throw your 100 parametrized runs into the queue, and the headnode/scheduler will keep all available nodes busy until all work is done. The hierarchical approach of classical beowulf works just fine for that. Michael Will Sr. Cluster Engineer Penguin Computing -----Original Message----- From: beowulf-bounces at beowulf.org on behalf of Tony Travis Sent: Tue 7/17/2007 8:03 AM To: beowulf at beowulf.org Subject: Re: [Beowulf] openMosix ending Robert G. Brown wrote: > On Mon, 16 Jul 2007, Jeffrey B. Layton wrote: > >> Afternoon all, >> >> I don't know how many people this affects, but I thought it was >> worth posting in case people are using openMosix. The >> leader of openMosix, Moshe Bar, has announced that the >> openMosix project is ending. >> >> http://sourceforge.net/forum/forum.php?forum_id=715406 >> >> While I haven't used openMosix, I've seen it used and it is >> pretty cool to see processes move around nodes. > > Yeah, but it has nearly always had a few tragic flaws. One was that it > was always basically a hack of a specific kernel version and image, > meaning that if you used it you were outside of a working kernel update > stream. The second was that it was basically a hack of a specific > kernel version and image at all, where one really would prefer a tool > that did the same thing outside of kernel space (like Condor, for > example). It survived those flaws, of course -- but it cannot survive > the advent of virtualization, which will provide new pathways for this > sort of thing to be done with far greater ease and stability. Hello, Robert. I've been using openMosix for a long time, and you're right about the kernel 'trap' it puts you into. I recently 'ported' linux-2.4.26-om1 to Ubuntu. Although I've succeeded in getting our 92-node Beowulf up and running openMosix under Ubuntu 6.06.1 LTS the end of life announcement means I have to start thinking about replacing it. Do you really think that Condor is an alternative to openMosix? I don't know much about Condor, but I thought is was a DRM (Distributed Resource Manager) like SGE. Is it more than that? The great thing about openMosix is that most 'ordinary' programs migrate. I've thought about using openSSI previously: What's your opinion about that for 'embarrassingly' parallel computation? Best wishes, Tony. -- Dr. A.J.Travis, | mailto:ajt at rri.sari.ac.uk Rowett Research Institute, | http://www.rri.sari.ac.uk/~ajt Greenburn Road, Bucksburn, | phone:+44 (0)1224 712751 Aberdeen AB21 9SB, Scotland, UK. | fax:+44 (0)1224 716687 _______________________________________________ Beowulf mailing list, Beowulf at beowulf.org To change your subscription (digest mode or unsubscribe) visit http://www.beowulf.org/mailman/listinfo/beowulf -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://www.scyld.com/pipermail/beowulf/attachments/20070717/4658b6d5/attachment.html
- Previous message: [Beowulf] openMosix ending
- Next message: [Beowulf] openMosix ending
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the Beowulf mailing list
