[Beowulf] NFS+XFS+SMP on kernel 2.6
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.
Suvendra Nath Dutta sdutta at cfa.harvard.eduWed Jun 15 09:47:31 PDT 2005
- Previous message: [Beowulf] NFS+XFS+SMP on kernel 2.6
- Next message: [Beowulf] NFS+XFS+SMP on kernel 2.6
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
sauron:~ # uname -a Linux sauron 2.6.8.1-suse91-osmp #1 SMP Thu Sep 2 01:10:09 EDT 2004 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux Robert raised a similar question just before. Usage is really restricted to just logging in and qsubbing a job. I've asked users to start a interactive qsub when compiling, but that rarely happens. I've removed all visualization and analysis software so people don't do anything bad. The users usually don't even rcp files out, because the filesystem is NFS shared (over a different port, see below) to a biggish analysis machine where they run their analysis jobs. They do ssh in and use X tunneling. But that is a different network port from the one that NFS sharing is done. One port NFS shares out the filesystem to the nodes (plain GB ethernet). Another port NFS shares (the same filesystem) to a multiprocessor analysis machine. A third port is used by users to connect to the server. In addition I run ganglia which chews up the bandwidth. I've suggested people use the node's scratch disk to output data and copy over the files at the end of the job, but not everyone listens. I guess I could update the kernel. Its certainly not automated, but updating by hand is fairly simple. I have also considered adding 2 more GB memory to the head node. Maybe that is a cheaper solution than buying a different machine. Also is it possible to have a redundant head node? It sounds impossible, or is it possible? Suvendra. On Jun 15, 2005, at 12:27 PM, Joe Landman wrote: > > Hi Suvendra: > > > Suvendra Nath Dutta wrote: >> We set up a 160 node cluster with a dual processor head node with 2GB >> RAM. The head node also has two RAID devices attached to two SCSI >> cards. These have a XFS filesystem on them and are NFS exported to >> the cluster. The head node runs very low on memory (7-8 MB). And >> today I ran into a kernel bug that crashed the system. Google >> suggests that I should upgrade to kernel 2.6.11, but that sounds very >> unpleasant. I am thinking of putting the raid boxes on a different >> box. Will separating the file-server and the head node give me back >> stability on the head node? > > What distribution are you using today? Which kernel? > > what does your uasge pattern look like on the head node and on the > file server? > > Joe > >> Suvendra. >> _______________________________________________ >> Beowulf mailing list, Beowulf at beowulf.org >> To change your subscription (digest mode or unsubscribe) visit >> http://www.beowulf.org/mailman/listinfo/beowulf > > -- > Joseph Landman, Ph.D > Founder and CEO > Scalable Informatics LLC, > email: landman at scalableinformatics.com > web : http://www.scalableinformatics.com > phone: +1 734 786 8423 > fax : +1 734 786 8452 > cell : +1 734 612 4615
- Previous message: [Beowulf] NFS+XFS+SMP on kernel 2.6
- Next message: [Beowulf] NFS+XFS+SMP on kernel 2.6
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the Beowulf mailing list
