[Beowulf] best linux distribution
jmdavis1 at vcu.edu
Mon Oct 8 10:52:45 PDT 2007
Robert G. Brown wrote:
> On Mon, 8 Oct 2007, Mike Davis wrote:
>> My experience is similar to Bill's. We've been using CentOs 3,4 for
>> the past few years on our larger clusters. It is a good choice for
>> stability, good performance, and since it is RH for SW compatability.
> The only thing I'd comment on that is negative about it is one of its
> "advantages". There is a narrow line between stability and stagnation,
> and you have to figure out which side of that line your cluster will
> fall on. Specifically, the fact that Centos/RHEL is frozen for two year
> intervals has two disadvantages for some people:
I don't see this as a problem in a production cluster. The fact is that
I've been doing this stuff for a little over two decades and I can build
anything that I need for an application. For me a manual library build
for CentOs 3 is easier than trying to find support for FC4 or
reinstalling FC 1x per year. My CentOs 3 nodes have had less than 2hours
downtime in 2 years and that was due to a Power Upgrade at their
location, that required a complete shutdown of all machines on the floor.
Now I should say, that I don't use diskless nodes, each node has its own
OS disk and most have a separate /tmp disk for scratch use. That is one
reason that we differ on OS, I believe.
More information about the Beowulf