[Beowulf] Re: Finally, a solution for the 64 core 4TB RAM market
hahn at mcmaster.ca
Fri May 29 06:00:34 PDT 2009
>> I would guess that most people who currently have clusters would rather get
>> bigger/faster/cooler clusters, rather than go to SMP, unless for some
>> reason they have a fixed problem size. possible, I guess.
> We intentionally built one cluster recently as a throughput system, with slow
> (ok, gigabit) interconnect, while the latest is "HPC" with DDR IB
> We have throughput users (most jobs run on a single node, and can take
> advantage of the node's memory footprint). A number of these are SMP or
> SMP-lite. Did I mention computational chemistry?
sure - we have >3k users and lots of all these categories as well
(and have also specialized our clusters). but the point is that
8-socket fat nodes are going to be more expensive; traditionally
nonlinearly more expensive. current 4s boxes are more than 2x 2s cost.
having fewer nodes is also a value, but mainly only if you wind up with
single-digit numbers of nodes - if you're wrangling a cluster, it hardly
matters whether it's 200 or 400 nodes. (again, fat nodes have not
historically saved on power or space - at least not proportionally.)
> We also have some folk interested in map-reduce, but I've not been able to
> accommodate them just yet.
yes, us too. what are your thoughts on the kind of config that would suit
them - just the google sort of layout? (gigabit, I suppose. probably
dual-socket, with however many 2G dimms will fit, and a couple large
> Depends on your mix of users.
I still think the market for 64c machines is relatively small.
More information about the Beowulf