What to do with a stack of computer hardware....
Discussion
1xCompaq raid server crammed with hard drives. (2x1ghz CPUS etc)
1xDell raid server crammed with hard drives. (2x550 CPUS etc)
4xdesktop systems (1Ghz and above)
Various motherboards+CD+floppy drives - Diskless slaves?
I was thinking about a cluster computer. Has anyone tried this? My level of Linux/Unix is quite low but can it be done in a Windows/DOS enviroment?
I wondered if you can get an SMP emulator for a PC that looks like an X amount of CPU's in your machine?
Most of the systems I have been looking at just do sectonal chunks at the problem, like SETI.
any ideas/pointer
1xDell raid server crammed with hard drives. (2x550 CPUS etc)
4xdesktop systems (1Ghz and above)
Various motherboards+CD+floppy drives - Diskless slaves?
I was thinking about a cluster computer. Has anyone tried this? My level of Linux/Unix is quite low but can it be done in a Windows/DOS enviroment?
I wondered if you can get an SMP emulator for a PC that looks like an X amount of CPU's in your machine?
Most of the systems I have been looking at just do sectonal chunks at the problem, like SETI.
any ideas/pointer
scared but happy said:
I was thinking about a cluster computer. Has anyone tried this? My level of Linux/Unix is quite low but can it be done in a Windows/DOS enviroment?
Yes but you need supporting software, I would guess you're more likely to find 'freeware' for linux than you are for windows.
And if you have to pay it will definitely not be cheap!
Blimey, not asking for much are you? 
Cluster computing is in its infancy and is therefore a complete nightmare in the real world (and what would you actually use it for? I'm intrigued - is there some practical application or is it purely to keep you off the streets?)
Look up Linux Beowulf clustering, but it's really not for the faint-hearted!
Cluster computing is in its infancy and is therefore a complete nightmare in the real world (and what would you actually use it for? I'm intrigued - is there some practical application or is it purely to keep you off the streets?) Look up Linux Beowulf clustering, but it's really not for the faint-hearted!
deckster said:
purely to keep you off the streets? 
Look up Linux Beowulf clustering, but it's really not for the faint-hearted!
I had a look at that. Quite intresting. I see Microsoft are doing a Compute Cluster this is out sometime this year.
www.microsoft.com/windowsserver2003/ccs/overview.mspx
BUT I have not got any 64bit machines to try the Beta version on
I can see the point of splitting up the problem and attacking it at various points, like rendering as posted before and I will have a go at that.
It just seems a shame to have a load of hardware around and not find a good use for it.
jamieboy said:
drbd
yes its high availablity, is it application / load balancing clustering we are talking about here?
what is the cluster for?
I know the windows version requires a two node system with external storage (shared) or a multi node that can use internal storage but more than 50% of the cluster must be operational at any time, therefore at least 3 to a cluster and 2 must be running.
The alternative is load balancing, which tried to spread an application load across more than one server
for LB you can do it any recent windows server, clustering requires datacenter, advanced or enterprise versions.
lotusfan said:Yep, as I say, I've got plenty of Windows clustering experience. I think the OP was talking about symmetrical processing, or grid computing, or whatever term to describe running the same processing task over multiple machines.
for LB you can do it any recent windows server, clustering requires datacenter, advanced or enterprise versions.
jamieboy said:
for LB you can do it any recent windows server, clustering requires datacenter, advanced or enterprise versions.
ah yes, that does sound like load balancing
lotusfan said:Not to me it doesn't.
ah yes, that does sound like load balancing
To me (although I've done more with high-availabiltiy than load-balancing) load-balancing involves sending new task requests to whichever server is best able to cope with them.
Cluster computing, in this context, involves processing a single task across multiple machines.
These are not the same thing.
Maybe I've misunderstood the original post, but I think we're talking about something a lot more complex and interesting than simple load-balancing.
scared but happy said:
It just seems a shame to have a load of hardware around and not find a good use for it.
A pile of kit that size will use at least a kilowatt of power, so unless there is some practical application for this, it would be cheaper to keep a kettle permanently boiling 24x7.
Have a play, set up your cluster, then once it's working give the kit to charideeeeeeeeee......
jamieboy said:
ah yes, that does sound like load balancing
To me (although I've done more with high-availabiltiy than load-balancing) load-balancing involves sending new task requests to whichever server is best able to cope with them.
Cluster computing, in this context, involves processing a single task across multiple machines.
These are not the same thing.
Maybe I've misunderstood the original post, but I think we're talking about something a lot more complex and interesting than simple load-balancing.
I see, i've not tried to use it for that before, its always been as a failover system when in cluster format and power access in LB format, didn't nasa use a cluster of this type for modelling meteor strikes or similar, something like a thousand servers with four procs each to crunch the data as one supercomputer?
Gassing Station | Computers, Gadgets & Stuff | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff