[Beowulf] PVFS or NFS in a Beowulf cluster?
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.
Robert G. Brown rgb at phy.duke.eduMon Jan 17 21:41:35 PST 2005
- Previous message: [Beowulf] PVFS or NFS in a Beowulf cluster?
- Next message: [Beowulf] Re: [Bioclusters] servers for bio web services setup
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
On Mon, 17 Jan 2005, Kumaran Rajaram wrote: > > I would suggest PVFS2. It offers greater bandwidth (proportional to > number of I/O nodes dedicated) compared to NFS. Also, you may use PVFS2 > native file interface (rather than POSIX I/O interface) which offers > flexible parallel I/O interface for scientific workloads. Only caveat, is > fault-tolerance support and you might need to employ either > software/hardware RAID for disk failures and heartbeat mechanism for > server failures. If the environment has less probability of > server/disk/netowrk faults, then PVFS2 is a good choice for scientific > workloads and parallel applications. Hmmm, I'd have recommended the usual "it depends". If all you are doing is starting jobs from home directories or mounted project space and writing occasional results back to same (not exactly hammering the disks) and your storage needs are modest -- within the means of a single RAID 5 server (say ~1 TB or less, these days) I'd personally advise sticking with tried-and-true NFS. NFS has all sorts of well-known and in some cases venerable "problems", but it has also been the absolute bulwark of client-server computing in unix environments for some 20 years, the sine qua non of the workstation LAN. Most of its problems are manageable and invisible under ordinary usage. Only if your needs are extreme -- needs for a LARGE filespace, for lots of data parallelism, etc -- would I recommend looking into a non-NFS solution, especially for a first cluster of very modest size. I mean, disk is SO cheap at less than $1/GB. I have more disk in EACH of my home computers than existed in the world when NFS was invented. Setting up a RAID server for a small cluster with 100's of GB costs a total of well under $1000 -- so little you can get two and use one to back up the other, if you'd rather do that than mess with a tape backup unit (which will cost quite a bit MORE than $1000). Setting up NFS on a server takes a few minutes. It would take longer just to find PVFS and read the documentation on HOW to install it... If NFS doesn't work for you, then sure, look beyond it. But start out simple, especially if you are already familiar with NFS servers and clients (likely) and not so familiar with PVFS (also likely). rgb > > -Kums > > On Thu, 13 Jan 2005, Stavros E. Zogas wrote: > > > Hi at all > > I intend to setup a beowulf cluster(16+ nodes) for scientific > > applications(fortran compilers) in a University department.What am i supposd > > to use???PVFS or NFS for file system?? > > Stavros > > > _______________________________________________ > Beowulf mailing list, Beowulf at beowulf.org > To change your subscription (digest mode or unsubscribe) visit http://www.beowulf.org/mailman/listinfo/beowulf > -- Robert G. Brown http://www.phy.duke.edu/~rgb/ Duke University Dept. of Physics, Box 90305 Durham, N.C. 27708-0305 Phone: 1-919-660-2567 Fax: 919-660-2525 email:rgb at phy.duke.edu
- Previous message: [Beowulf] PVFS or NFS in a Beowulf cluster?
- Next message: [Beowulf] Re: [Bioclusters] servers for bio web services setup
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the Beowulf mailing list
