disadvantages of a linux cluster

Leif Nixon nixon at nsc.liu.se
Wed Nov 6 11:48:21 PST 2002

"Paul Redfern" <red at tc.cornell.edu> writes:

> The first four months (initial period of analysis) with Windows 2000
> Advanced Server, MIT reported 99.9986% uptime. Since then, the
> machine got hardened and reliability for it and our other clusters,
> has gotten better, not worse. We've been operating Windows 2000
> clusters since the server OS was first introduced. Typically outages
> are handled in less than ten minutes on one node with spare memory
> and hard drives. Outages don't affect the overall cluster; the
> scheduler works around it, and the cluster continues to run.

So a single node failure doesn't count against the uptime, is that
what you are saying? If that is the case, precisly what definition of
"uptime" are you using?

Leif Nixon                                    Systems expert
National Supercomputer Centre           Linkoping University

More information about the Beowulf mailing list