[Beowulf] scaling / file serving
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.
John Hearns john.hearns at clustervision.comFri Jun 11 00:00:34 PDT 2004
- Previous message: [Beowulf] scaling / file serving
- Next message: [linux-elitists] Re: Fedora cluster project? (was Re: [Beowulf] Opteron/Athlon Clustering) (fwd from rgb@phy.duke.edu) (fwd from claw@kanga.nu)
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
On Thu, 2004-06-10 at 22:55, Joe Landman wrote: > > Building a disk system is easy, building one that scales well is hard. > > The other issue is local disk. There are some folks absolutely > horrified at the prospect of a cluster node having a local disk. Makes > management harder. I fully realise there are arguments both ways. We normally have a local disk on cluster nodes. It is formatted at install time, and either synced or formatted at reboot time. We can choose a partition table on a per-node basis. The clusters we put in for the NGS in the UK have two disks per node, one for data as you describe. We don't software RAID them though! I heard at CERN that if you are buying ATX cased systems it was more expensive to have them without disks in large quantities. (Let's not ignite the rack/ATX debate please)
- Previous message: [Beowulf] scaling / file serving
- Next message: [linux-elitists] Re: Fedora cluster project? (was Re: [Beowulf] Opteron/Athlon Clustering) (fwd from rgb@phy.duke.edu) (fwd from claw@kanga.nu)
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the Beowulf mailing list