diskless nodes? (was Re: Xbox clusters?)
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.
Greg Lindahl lindahl at conservativecomputer.comFri Dec 7 08:46:27 PST 2001
- Previous message: diskless nodes? (was Re: Xbox clusters?)
- Next message: Xbox clusters? -- humm
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
On Fri, Dec 07, 2001 at 04:26:37AM -0500, Velocet wrote: > It is a black and white choice "disk or not to disk" and people > decide one way or the other, and I am wondering what makes them > decide. I have information which indicates that for the parameters > on the systems I setup it works quite well. I need someone to point > out to me where my reasons are just dead wrong, And that's part of your mistake: nobody says your reasons are dead wrong for your sitation. The example someone gave you was a different situation, where local scratch disk is very useful. There is a place where you're dead wrong, and that's assuming that administering N separate system disks has to be hard. People who have N separate disks have usually developed tools to make keeping them in synch easier. greg
- Previous message: diskless nodes? (was Re: Xbox clusters?)
- Next message: Xbox clusters? -- humm
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the Beowulf mailing list
