(no subject)
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.
Schilling, Richard RSchilling at affiliatedhealth.orgMon Jul 17 18:34:18 PDT 2000
- Previous message: philosophical question - limits of beowulf defn
- Next message: Intel benchmarks fuel SDRAM vs. RDRAM debate
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
I posted this recently, and much to my surprise and embarrasment, it's RTF format. Sorry folks. Here it is again. ======================================== Dr. Ligon presents great points. . . Great discussion, and I'd like to interject a little $.02 from the health care industry. The attractiveness of beowulf technology lies in its definition: beowulf refers to a 'class' of machines, and general topology, which I believe is what the folks at NASA intended. That's important, because it lets me adopt the approach to what works best for my environment. Case in point, PVM, MPICH, JPVM or even Serialization of Java classes would, as I understand it be appropriately used in a beowulf cluster. That flexibility allows me to run proof of concepts on the hardware I have available. The general definition of beowulf-class machines also lets me focus on the functionality of my application more than the particular toolset used. Speed of prototyping is crucial to my research efforts where clustering in and of itself is not my core objective. So, a general purpose definition rather than a detailed specification is important - specific benchmarks, although an initial consideration, can be improved later. At the same time having a standard reference to a beowulf-class machine gives me an important frame of reference - and one I'll desperately need once I present my initial results to the boss to ask for more hardware!! Richard Schilling Web Integration Programmer Affiliated Health Services Mount Vernon, WA USA -----Original Message----- From: Walter B. Ligon III [mailto:walt at parl.ces.clemson.edu] Sent: Monday, July 17, 2000 10:56 AM To: David S. Greenberg Cc: Ward William E PHDN; 'Beowulf' Mailing List (E-mail) Subject: Re: philosophical question - limits of beowulf defn -------- A quick agreement on both Doug's contribution and David's posting. The EL community did grow up as a SUPERSET of Beowulf because there are many cluster based systems that are not, technically, a Beouwlf, but share many interesting problems. I think it is even MORE important to realize that the EL community is ALSO focused on the open-source (Linux) OS issue - which allows us to evolve the OS to better meet the needs of more extreme systems (one of which is a Beowulf). I have always been rather particular about the name "Beowulf" for two reasons: first, people did cluster computing long before Beowulf. When Beowulf came out many people said "so what? - it's been done before." but they missed an important point in the COTS HW and open-source OS! The specific characteristis of a Beowulf mean we are *free* to adapt the architecture because the nodes are dedicated, because the OS is open-source, because parallel computing is our goal. I think the next-gen Beowulf software we are working on is going to drive that point home like never before. second, there was an early tendency for people to say "everything is a Beowulf." I'm not against everyone joining the party, by there are many DIFFERENT approaches, including high availability designs, true distributed systems, cycle stealing, etc. and they have different issues. I don't want to dillute the effort going into ANY of these areas byt saying "Hey, its ALL Beowulf, so we're doing Beowulf and we don't need to do any more." That's not where its at. Beowulf is in its infancy, and it is NOT the answer to everyone's problem. I would rather ORGANIZE our efforts so that ALL of those efforts get the recoginition they deserve than let it all wind up a big cloudy mess! So that's why I always butt in on these discussions and why I always take the position that I do. The folks that defined the term had a specific thing in mind, and they have repeatedly indicated they want that definition to stay true (even though some of them are now off doing DIFFERENT things). Some day they may come down and tell me to shut up - but until then, I will try to let everyone know where this term came from. I'm not trying to be an ass-hole, I just want to let you know. Walt -- Dr. Walter B. Ligon III Associate Professor ECE Department Clemson University _______________________________________________ Beowulf mailing list Beowulf at beowulf.org http://www.beowulf.org/mailman/listinfo/beowulf -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://www.scyld.com/pipermail/beowulf/attachments/20000717/720e3a14/attachment.html
- Previous message: philosophical question - limits of beowulf defn
- Next message: Intel benchmarks fuel SDRAM vs. RDRAM debate
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the Beowulf mailing list
