[Beowulf] cluster toolkit comparison questions
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 Aug 9 00:13:50 PDT 2005
- Previous message: [Beowulf] channel bonding
- Next message: [Beowulf] Opteron, ifort and kernels
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
>> Afternoon all, >> I am in the process of making some assessments for architecture on >> a new cluster we are building and I have a couple of questions >> comparing OSCAR vs. Rocks. I certainly don't mind having other options >> presented, but diskless options like warewulf are already precluded >> because of administrative fiat. You should look at Scyld. Our solution dramatically simplifies the deployment, management and day-to-day use of Linux cluster resources. It's also commercially developed and supported. It can also be configured to work with either disked or diskless compute nodes as well as multiple directories on different file systems. Adding or deleting of resources can be done in seconds. Maybe you can detail what administrative fiat you are worried about, because in my experience, having diskless booting nodes makes administration super-easy. Diskless booting does not mean that you cannot put in a disk for application temporary scratch space etc, it just means that all configuration has to be done only on the headnode and that adding new nodes does not require any installation on the node. >> 1) How well can Oscar or Rocks be integrated with an LDAP directory? Scyld: Because the Scyld system is centrally configured through the head node, an integration with LDAP only has to be done once. All the basic infrastructure code to support LDAP is already in place; however, LDAP is not commercially supported at this time. >> 2) Does Oscar and/or Rocks have support for multiple head nodes? Scyld: Yes. The system can be configured for multiple head nodes to provide high availability of computing resources. >> 3) Does either toolkit have problems with home directories coming off >> from a separate NFS appliance instead of living on a filesystem on the >> head node that gets exported to the compute nodes directly from there? Scyld: There are no file system restrictions placed on the system. Directories can be configured by a simple text file either globally or on a node-by-node basis. Michael Will
- Previous message: [Beowulf] channel bonding
- Next message: [Beowulf] Opteron, ifort and kernels
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the Beowulf mailing list
