look this
http://bhs.broo.k12.wv.us/homepage/staff/seti/farms.htm

> look this
> http://bhs.broo.k12.wv.us/homepage/staff/seti/farms.htm
>

WoW

Talk about addicted

---

look also here
and here
and more

Hehe ;-) ...
And where does this guy sleep?
I guess with all those Pentiums around "toasting" the air he has no need for central heating either :-).

I don't want to bay the electricity bill! :-0

Does anybody know of a farm that's running as a cluster instead of as individual hosts?

---

Rob

> Does anybody know of a farm that's running as a cluster instead of as
> individual hosts?
>
where do you make the difference between individual hosts and clustering?

only the mesurement "everything" in one box, in one case couldn't be enough.

You mean something where you can increase/decrease virtual cpus?

ric

> Does anybody know of a farm that's running as a cluster instead of as
> individual hosts?

I tried to run 3 machines as a cluster using OpenMosix, not a successful experiment, but I am still pursuing other avenues. It seems cluster computing is better for memory hungry applications (like rendering) rather than CPU intensive ones.

However, I don't give up that easily. I'll post details when I find something that works.


www.Support-Aurora.org.uk - Put Europeans On Mars!


S@h Berkeley's Staff Friends Club ©
[/url]

> > Does anybody know of a farm that's running as a cluster instead of as
> > individual hosts?
> >
> where do you make the difference between individual hosts and clustering?
>
> only the mesurement "everything" in one box, in one case couldn't be enough.
>
> You mean something where you can increase/decrease virtual cpus?

Well, a group of hosts is a group of individual computers... running different operating systems, not linked together all that much. A cluster runs OpenMOSIX or the like, causing many computers to act like one big SMP machine.

---

Rob

> I tried to run 3 machines as a cluster using OpenMosix, not a successful
> experiment, but I am still pursuing other avenues. It seems cluster computing
> is better for memory hungry applications (like rendering) rather than CPU
> intensive ones.
>
> However, I don't give up that easily. I'll post details when I find something
> that works.

Did you try ClusterKnoppix or what? I have three boxes for a month or two I'm considering attempting a cluster on.

What failed about it?

I wonder if boinc might not be able to detect that it's an SMP environment and run a single instance of a worker rather than the three instances necessary....

Clustering works well with multithreaded applications, which Boinc essentially becomes when it runs many worker applications, one for each CPU.

---

Rob

> Did you try ClusterKnoppix or what?

Yes, I booted 3 windows systems from ClusterKnoppix CD's.

> What failed about it?

It would only run one instance, it didn't seem to use both the processors on my HT P4, infact, it didn't seem to use even 50% of available processing power.

When changing settings (eg. for allowing migration of processes etc.), I would get errors or the selected options wouldn't save and just reset themselves.

I should say that I am a total linux newbie, so its very possible I was doing something wrong. I would love to hear any suggestions you might have for getting this to work.


www.Support-Aurora.org.uk - Put Europeans On Mars!


S@h Berkeley's Staff Friends Club ©
[/url]

> Does anybody know of a farm that's running as a cluster instead of as
> individual hosts

You must have heared about beowulf. unix clustering.

http://compnetworking.about.com/gi/dynamic/offsite.htm?site=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.beowulf.org%2F


An other fine source is the top500 rating of supercomputer, mostly with links behind

http://www.top500.org/

An other fine page for Linux clustering, sorry in german but nice pictures
http://www.mh-service.de/index-cluster.htm

===============================================

..processors on my HT P4,..
Guess you will not lose more than 25%, because the P4 HT is not a real Multiprocessor, only 2 virtual, but one physical CPU. Next year we see dual core chips. The "gain" with a supported OS m$ ist about the mentioned 25%, intel itself also talks about 25% gain versus same clocked, not HT mode.

Much more interest could be the used and optimized *nix version of the client.

======================================================
SMP/AMP
Symectric/asymetric multi processing

A really log time ago, have been at a presentation of an "new" IBM midrange system. New on those day, a AMP setup (asymentric). The baby had 2 CPUs.
One for every task. The additional CPU only for I/O.(disk/network)
Own physical Diskadapter (raid0,1)and own physical NIC. No logical units.
As mentioned a while ago.

AMD has shown, I beliefe it was last year, a "cluster environment"
based on 512 (physical) nodes, every node 2 MP CPUs (athlons)


================================================================

One of the finest MP system I had the luck to help to configure (and operate..)
was the IBM s/390 3090-600 OS MVS/XA, network VTAM/SNA.

This baby had 6 CPUs. The configuration was System A 3 CPUs, System B 2 CPUs and Testsystem C 1 CPU. Not dynamicaly, after IPL. On demand, the cpu of system C could be allocated/assigned to an other system.

> I should say that I am a total linux newbie, so its very possible I was doing
> something wrong. I would love to hear any suggestions you might have for
> getting this to work.

It's hard to say without me digging in and trying some OpenMOSIX (a'la clusterknoppix) myself. Hopefully I'll get around to booting the three systems due for a *very* long burn-in with ClusterKnoppix to see how it works...

Until then....

---

Rob

Woah! My hat's off to him!