[Beowulf] Remote console management
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.
David Mathog mathog at mendel.bio.caltech.eduFri Sep 23 08:54:54 PDT 2005
- Previous message: [Beowulf] Remote console management
- Next message: [Beowulf] Remote console management
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Julien Leduc <julien.leduc at lri.fr> wrote > Something interesting we used (and are still using without any problem > since installation), is a homemade reboot solution, replacing the > frontpanel with a controled switch (in the final hardware design we > found some industrial grade controlled transistor) every boxe allows to > control 16 nodes and you can chain 256 of them, which is ok for big > clusters, the only problem, is that as a homemade solution, you have to > solder everything (replacing frontpanels is not a big deal, because, it > just means replacing the original pins with the one of your solution, no > soldering should be required on the nodes). I once considered implementing something similar but couldn't justify the cost since we have few nodes and I can easily walk over to them. Anyway, the point is that the on/off and reset switches are attached by leads to low power headers on the motherboard. So instead of running those leads to the standard buttons on the front of the case one could instead thread them out the back of the machine through any convenient ventilation hole and wire each pair to a separate electrically controlled switch (normally open). Those switches in turn be provided by any number of readily available hardware. It would be nice if the manufacturers provided a standard jack on the backs of the nodes wired in parallel with the front panel switches for this purpose, but I've never seen a machine where this has been done. The main problem with it (other than cost) that I see is that if these back jacks weren't used you'd want to cover them so that they couldn't be accidentally shorted, causing an unintentional reset or power event. I estimate that adding these jacks would cost Dell or any other major manufacturer about $1 per node. The external box and wires to control these switches might run $10 per node (it's just a bunch of switches). In other words, it would be much, much, much cheaper than the IPMI or KVM solutions, while admittedly not quite as useful. Also sometimes neither the reset switch nor the power switch work (Tyan anybody?) and the only way to reset the machine is to cut off power where it enters the node. That's harder to do with a low voltage switch because the relevant leads that exist to do this are inside the power connector from the PS to the motherboard. Any power switch present on the PS, and on rack mount nodes, these tend not to be present in any case, are likely to be line voltage AC. So again, it would be nice if the PS brought two normally open lines which when shorted caused the PS to shut down. Regards, David Mathog mathog at caltech.edu Manager, Sequence Analysis Facility, Biology Division, Caltech
- Previous message: [Beowulf] Remote console management
- Next message: [Beowulf] Remote console management
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the Beowulf mailing list
