[Beowulf] Best Practices SOL vs Cyclades ACS

[Daniel.Kidger at bull.co.uk]

>Rich Sudlow wrote:
>> In the past we've used cyclades console servers for serial
>> interfaces into our cluster nodes.
>> 
>> We're replacing 360 nodes which couldn't do SOL with 360
>> which could.
>> 
>> Now that we can do SOL is that a better to use that instead of the 
>> Cyclades?
>> 
>> Thoughts?
>
>Every now and then IPMI gets wedged.  We have seen it on all IPMI 
>stacks.  When IPMI gets wedged, SOL stops working.
>
>I recommend redundant administrative pathways ... make sure you can get 
>to and control the machine in the event of a problem.  Some pathways may 
>not be as cost effective at scale than others.

I suggest that if you are already comfortable with Cyclades Terminal 
servers and already have them configured plus all the cables are already 
there, then why not continue to use them.
I guess you already use the feature where they can write the console logs 
to a NFS mounted filesystem?
 
Redundant pathways are always a bonus. However here you might have 
problems in having effectively 2 simulatenous serial consoles.

Daniel




 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.beowulf.org/pipermail/beowulf/attachments/20091009/3befec50/attachment.html>