[Beowulf] Re: Wireless cluster
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.
Jim Lux James.P.Lux at jpl.nasa.govFri Mar 24 07:34:49 PST 2006
- Previous message: [Beowulf] [owner-chemistry@ccl.net: CCL: Wireless cluster]
- Next message: [Beowulf] [owner-chemistry@ccl.net: CCL: Wireless cluster]
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
At 06:35 AM 3/24/2006, Eugen Leitl wrote: >From: jmmckel at attglobal.net > >----- Forwarded message from "John McKelvey jmmckel%x%attglobal.net" ><owner-chemistry at ccl.net> ----- > >From: "John McKelvey jmmckel%x%attglobal.net" <owner-chemistry at ccl.net> >Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2006 09:28:57 -0500 >To: "Leitl, Eugen -id#3h6-" <eugen at leitl.org> >Subject: CCL: Wireless cluster >Reply-To: CCL Subscribers <chemistry at ccl.net> > >Sent to CCL by: John McKelvey [jmmckel!^!attglobal.net] >Cheers! > >Please don't laugh, or maybe this is so funny [ridiculous?] that you'll >get a good laugh, and it will make your day! > >Anyway, I want to build a small linux cluster [6-8 total processors] but >don't have a lot of cooling in one place. Running wires would not be >practical, if not impossible Now, the application is extremely >coarse-grain, and only a very, very small amount of data gets moved >about once initialization of a job is done.. Can it be done "wireless?" Most definitely. As Verne quotes Arne Saknussemm,"Quod feci!" (or, depending on which translation: "Hod feci".. these things are important.. just like exponentiation as A^B or A**B, or 026 vs 029){and no, I don't know how to say it in West Saxon, yet} I used 802.11a wireless access points (Dlink D7000AP) in point-to-multipoint bridging mode on each node. Be very aware that data rates on wireless links (claims of tens of Mbps notwithstanding) are truly low. AND, there's a huge latency. Ping times for short packets) between nodes (with the nodes side by side) are in the 100 millisecond range for the first ping, then drop on successive pings to tens of milliseconds. First, the wireless channel is shared among all contenders, and they can only transmit one at a time. And there's not any centralized allocation of time slots. THink in terms of old style wired ethernet all on the same coax. Second, the packets all start at the low speed(2Mbps), and then change to the high speed in the middle of the packet, assuming propagation is good enough. Third, there's a fair amount of overhead on each packet (in terms of time) for synchronization sequences, settling time for the radios, etc. Fourth, there is a LOT of non-determinism in the packet timing. Don't be expecting to run NTP and synchronize your clocks to microseconds with wireless. However, except for speed, it works fairly well.. you can PXE boot across the wireless network from a NFS server, for instance. >Please share your laughs... > >Cheers.. >John McKelvey > James Lux, P.E. Spacecraft Radio Frequency Subsystems Group Flight Communications Systems Section Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Mail Stop 161-213 4800 Oak Grove Drive Pasadena CA 91109 tel: (818)354-2075 fax: (818)393-6875
- Previous message: [Beowulf] [owner-chemistry@ccl.net: CCL: Wireless cluster]
- Next message: [Beowulf] [owner-chemistry@ccl.net: CCL: Wireless cluster]
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the Beowulf mailing list
