[Beowulf] Compute Node OS on Local Disk vs. Ram Disk
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.
Eric Thibodeau kyron at neuralbs.comWed Oct 1 14:27:11 PDT 2008
- Previous message: [Beowulf] Compute Node OS on Local Disk vs. Ram Disk
- Next message: [Beowulf] Compute Node OS on Local Disk vs. Ram Disk
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Bogdan Costescu wrote: > On Tue, 30 Sep 2008, Eric Thibodeau wrote: > >> This has given me much flexibility and a very fast path to upgrade >> the nodes (LIVE!) since they would only need to be rebooted if I >> changed the kernel. I can install/upgrade the node's environment by >> simply chrooting into it and using the node's package manager and >> utilities as if it were a regular system). > > Only the first is an advantage of using NFS-root; the second is shared > by most methods that use a node "image". More or less, NFS-root changes are "propagated" instantly, most other approaches require a re-sync. Another way to see this, the NFS root approach only does changes on the head node and changed files don't need to be propagated and are accessed on a as-needed basis, this might have significant impacts on large deployments....not that I suggest that they use this approach ;) > However random installations or modifications of configuration file > within the chroot become very difficult to reproduce when you build > the next node "image" Document document document...which no one does...but document. > - either scripting everything or using cfengine/puppet/etc. can save a > lot of time in the long run, despite the initial effort to set up. I'll take your word for it that they have a version tracking mechanism. >> But I am in a special case where, if I break the cluster, I can fix >> it quickly and I always have a backup copy of the boot "root" image >> ready to switch to if my fiddling goes wrong. > Why not keeping several "images" around and only point the nodes to > mount the one considered current or "good" ? Well, that's what I meant... probably not clearly. ;) Eric
- Previous message: [Beowulf] Compute Node OS on Local Disk vs. Ram Disk
- Next message: [Beowulf] Compute Node OS on Local Disk vs. Ram Disk
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the Beowulf mailing list
