[Beowulf] recommendation on crash cart for a cluster room: full cluster KVM is not an option I suppose?
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.
Joe Landman landman at scalableinformatics.comSat Oct 3 10:13:58 PDT 2009
- Previous message: [Beowulf] recommendation on crash cart for a cluster room: full cluster KVM is not an option I suppose?
- Next message: [Beowulf] recommendation on crash cart for a cluster room: full cluster KVM is not an option I suppose?
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Rahul Nabar wrote: > On Sat, Oct 3, 2009 at 11:54 AM, Joe Landman > <landman at scalableinformatics.com> wrote: > >> If I were building a cluster of anything more than 4 machines (not racks, >> machines), I would be insisting upon IPMI 2.0 with a working SOL and kvm >> over IP capability built in. > > Thanks for those tips Joe. I am already convinced by all the posts on > the list that IPMI is a must. No other way. All you guys seem pretty > unanimous about that much! > >> For the 250-300 machine system you are looking at, you *want* IPMI 2.0 with >> KVM over IP. You *want* switched remotely accessible PDUs, for those times >> when IPMI itself gets wedged (rarer these days, but it does still happen). >> IMO you *want* this IPMI on a separate network. You *want* a serial >> concentrator type system to provide a redundant path in the event of an IPMI >> failure. Problems don't go away just because IPMI stopped working. You >> *need* an inexpensive crash cart that just works, and plugs into your PDUs. > > I see, thanks for disabusing me of my notion of "ipmi" as one > monolithic all-or-none creature. From what you write (and my online > reading) it seems there are several discrete parts: > > IMPI 2.0 > switched remotely accessible PDUs > "serial concentrator type system " > > Correct me if I am wrong but these are all "options" and varying > vendors and implementations will offer parts or all or none of these? Yes. > Or is it that when one says "IPMI 2" it includes all these features. I IPMI 2.0 includes * local power control (on-off switch in software) * Serial-over-lan * system sensor inspection It *may* contain kvm over IP (the clusters we build do). > did read online but these implementation seem vendor specific so its > hard to translate jargon across vendors. e.g. for Dell they are called > DRAC's etc. IPMI 2.0 at minimum is a must. DRAC has levels which also provide kvm over IP, though at additional cost. > > Finally, what's a"serial concentrator"? Isn't that the same as the > SOL that Skylar was explaining to me? Or is that something different > too? Something different. A serial concentrator is a machine you can ssh into providing N serial ports. It is different than the IPMI SOL capability. It is a second non-IPMI management channel. For large systems, I'd recommend multiple administrative paths ... > -- Joseph Landman, Ph.D Founder and CEO Scalable Informatics Inc. email: landman at scalableinformatics.com web : http://scalableinformatics.com http://scalableinformatics.com/jackrabbit phone: +1 734 786 8423 x121 fax : +1 866 888 3112 cell : +1 734 612 4615
- Previous message: [Beowulf] recommendation on crash cart for a cluster room: full cluster KVM is not an option I suppose?
- Next message: [Beowulf] recommendation on crash cart for a cluster room: full cluster KVM is not an option I suppose?
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the Beowulf mailing list
