[Beowulf] adding a cluster to a traditional supercomputer
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.
Gerry Creager N5JXS gerry.creager at tamu.eduThu Feb 9 20:44:45 PST 2006
- Previous message: [Beowulf] adding a cluster to a traditional supercomputer
- Next message: [Beowulf] adding a cluster to a traditional supercomputer
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
While we're discussion interesting variations, is anyone here familiar with the IBM T5+ hardware, and the potential for 8x16-way nodes with 16GB/node... nominally shared memory but supposedly reconfigurable (dynamically) for NUMA? Thoughts, experiences, suspicions are all welcome. Thanks gerry Florent Calvayrac wrote: > Dear list, > > Some colleagues have at last decided to give up the upgrading of their > traditional shared-memory supercomputer, which I have always found a > waste of money with its 32 cores which gives it less power > than our 100+ cluster for 6 times the price. I find that traditional > big iron is only > justified above 128 or 256 processors where the excellent memory coupling > gives an advantage on certain codes, and only if it is not shared among > n+1 users. > (so the science has to be good...) > > Anyway, those colleagues now want to spend some money on a cluster and > are new to the field. > They wish to keep their current setup (excellent AC, UPS, dust > free-floor..) > and above all their very good file system on the front node of their > "old" 32-way SMP which comes with a cluster file system, > SAN storage with fiberchannel,. etc > > They want to go for a bunch (depending on final budget) > of racked Myrinet or Infiniband connected 4-way Opteron dual core nodes > (some > users need OpenMP on 8 cores), but > the question is open for the filesystem ; should they rely on NFS over > Gigabit ethernet and attack their "old" fileserver (which is excellent), > with some fears for some heavy I/O codes, add fiberchannel ports to > some (or all) nodes on which the I/O bound codes would be dispatched with > a good PBS setup (best solution but expensive), or add another, > dedicated NFS server with > several gigabit ethernet cards, each for serving only parts of the new > cluster, > this "new" fileserver itself getting its files via CFS, fiberchannel, or > even NFS > from the "old" fileserver ? > > They invited me to the discussion, but having not much practice on I/O > bound > code, I could not really answer to those questions. > > > Any comments, suggestions, ideas ? > > thanks in advance > > _______________________________________________ > Beowulf mailing list, Beowulf at beowulf.org > To change your subscription (digest mode or unsubscribe) visit > http://www.beowulf.org/mailman/listinfo/beowulf -- Gerry Creager -- gerry.creager at tamu.edu Texas Mesonet -- AATLT, Texas A&M University Cell: 979.229.5301 Office: 979.458.4020 FAX: 979.862.3983 Office: 1700 Research Parkway Ste 160, TAMU, College Station, TX 77843
- Previous message: [Beowulf] adding a cluster to a traditional supercomputer
- Next message: [Beowulf] adding a cluster to a traditional supercomputer
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the Beowulf mailing list
