Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Cray Linux Beowulf Clusters

Posted by CmdrTaco on from the its-pretty-so-pretty dept.

An anonymous reader wrote in to say that Cray has announced that they will be selling their own Linux Beowulf clusters. They're apparently gonna be working with Scyld on the software, and they of course have some crazy hardware (of course the name is SuperCluster, but I guess stupid names are nothing new ;)

31 of 100 comments (clear)

  1. Re:That's kind of weird. by selectspec · · Score: 2

    How about taking a couple Cray supercomps, and installing Beowolf on all of them. It would be a cluster of Crays.

    --

    Someone you trust is one of us.

  2. Boy what a news day this has been by babbage · · Score: 2
    In other news, Microsoft has announced that they are going to be porting all their software to Wine.:
    SEATTLE--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Jan. 29, 2001-- Global software leader Microsoft (Nasdaq:MSFT - news) today announced plans to offer "Wine" Linux SuperOffice® systems -- highly-robust versions of their current desktop productivity software that combine blazing problem-solving speed with increasingly popular data stability, attractive price-performance and the popular Linux operating system.

    The product line will be formally launched in coming months and is scheduled to begin shipping in the mid-2001 timeframe. The company has received an early order agreement from ApplixWare and expects to announce multiple orders by the time of the product launch. Financial terms were not none of your damn business.

    ``The Microsoft SuperOffice Series targets the need for clusters with higher capability than those available in the market today,'' said Microsoft Chairman and CEO Steve Ballmer. ``Organizations around the world have told us they want the advanced capabilities of our Office productivity suite to be re-architected using leading COTS (commercial off-the-shelf) Windows Emulation technologies. This is an attractive revenue growth opportunity for us.'' The Microsoft P2C2E(TM) (Process Too Complicated To Explain) system holds the world record for sustained computer reliability and was named 2000 ``Super Duper Computer Product of the Year'' by someone or other.

    ``Starting in mid-2001 and continuing over the next two years, we plan to phase in unrivaled capabilities that enable customers in academia, government and industry to advance the boundaries of marketing and management while better managing their large, tedious workloads,'' said Willy Gates, software architect for the Microsoft SuperOffice series. ``We will combine Microsoft's Innovative (make sure you get that word -- innovative -- that's very important -- EYE ENN ENN OH VEE AY TEE EYE VEE EE) Windows-oriented architecture, proven Unicode client operating environment and advanced system software with Wine, the latest Windows-on-Windows emulation technology from those bastard godless open source poopieheads, and the highly scalable Gbberish.NET client-interconnect network from VapoCom''

    Gates said targeted capabilities include:

    • Superior sustained performance on Win32 based Intel computing environments working on various problem sizes and workloads, made possible by marrying the high-availability Microsoft SuperOffice architecture with our current Intel based clients -- based on the world's most commonly available 32-bit processor -- and API's ``network aware'' Windows facility.
    • Superior workplace capabilities, including high availability (cold starts, lukewarm performance, warm feelings, and hot tempers); global checkpoint/restart (in the event of a system interrupt, deletes all users' work and abruptly ends jobs, forcing an angry recovery); global resource mis-management; secure socket layer based network security coming Real Soon Now to even the lowliest customer sizes (thousands of processors); more or less efficient job scheduling (ok not really but who's gonna notice?), low prioritization, creative accounting, and some other gibberish that this reporter stopped writing down because he knew you would have stopped reading by now.
    Etc. Boy, some projects are just screaming to be born, aren't they?



    --
    DO NOT LEAVE IT IS NOT REAL
  3. Re:Geekizoid! by phil+reed · · Score: 2

    How beautiful is the snowshine in your eyes, so directly current from the static in your brain.


    ...phil

    --

    ...phil
    "For a list of the ways which technology has failed to improve our quality of life, press 3."
  4. Re:Geekizoid! by florin · · Score: 2

    My sentiments exactly.

  5. I think I see by twitter · · Score: 2

    What you are saying, is that the next MS Office will need a cluster of Crays to run?

    --

    Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.

  6. Re:Which Cray is Weird? by fm6 · · Score: 2
    Now that I think back, you're right about the Origin. I was mislead by the fact that this is the only system that actually employs Craylink. Sort of ironic, no?

    Of course, SGI used to put the Cray label on all Origins with 64 or more processors. But I don't suppose that counts...

    You're probably also right in thinking that Cray #4 has more Cray than Tera. But I think the result is closer to Cray #2 than Cray #1.

    __________________

  7. I wonder... by kennedy · · Score: 2

    I wonder if Cray intends to use one of it's proprietary networking (like craylink) instead of 100/1000Base-t. IMHO- that would be quiet bad ass. Even more so because the source code would provide and *amazing* example (the core theory... like how cray manages memory or distributes load) for the open source super computer community.

    Also, could this help Compaq feel better that it's still keeping the Alpha alive? It's really quite sad to see such an awsome chip not in much use.

  8. Re:-1, Troll by passion · · Score: 2

    to make it one better...
    a set worker accidentally spilled hot grits on the beowulfed cray machine that was embedding encrypted DeCSS code into the 3-d rendering of Natalie Portman in the Episode II love scenes with Anakin...

    --
    - passion
  9. Re:Beowulf clusters... by fgodfrey · · Score: 5
    The big difference is service. SGI is not (and I suspect neither are the other vendors you mention) "just doing a wget for the latest beowulf tarball". When you buy a cluster from us, you can get a whole mess of stuff like service contracts. Also, when you take the thing out of the box (or large wooden shipping crate) it will "just work" and have a bunch of software like load balancing and batch scheduling with it. Yeah, this stuff is almost all open source and yeah, you can get it free on the net (probably off our website among other places) and for the majority of the people reading this, that is enough for them to build their own cluster in their spare time. The problem is businesses don't wanna do this. So the point is to add value to Linux/Beowulf/other stuff and resell it and make a proffit. Since one company does it, more follow.

    Cray has an incredible reputation in the HPC business so I suspect that some places will buy clusters from them simply because they are Cray and have provided excellent service in the past.

    --
    Go Badgers! -- #include "std/disclaimer.h"
  10. Re:That's kind of weird. by GrenDel+Fuego · · Score: 2

    A company called Tera recently purchased Cray, and renamed itself to Cray.

    The former supercomputer company is now actually a division of a company called cray, who most likely has other products, including this.

  11. Re:Craylink and Cray by fm6 · · Score: 2
    SGI lost its edge because it was inwardly focussed, in large part because Cray's problems were so large compared to its revenue generation ability, and there was not a manager with enough backbone to kill off the stuff that needed to die.

    The next time someone tells you that SGI ran Cray into the ground, just remember that Cray did most of this to themselves, with a combination of massive ego's, unwillingness to consider other points of view, and allowing themselves to be embedded in a completely dysfunctional organization.

    I used to work for SGI, but my involvement with the Cray side was very limited. So I bow to your interpretation, which is very plausible in any case.

    Still, I think SGI's "lack of focus" is kind of a secondary problem. They've never really had a managment capable of achieving focus, or any broad goal. Current insiders tend to blame this on Wall Street, which went to see Jurasic Park and came away determined to throw money at those who created the technology. Being awash in cash is sure death for any pioneer technology company -- it allows them to avoid addressing all the organizational issues that relate to their long-term survival.

    __________________

  12. It's so fast..... by doublem · · Score: 2

    It's so fast-

    How fast is it?

    It's so fast, it takes TWO halt instructions to stop it!

    Humor that predates the Arpanet
    www.matthewmiller.net

    --
    "Live Free or Die." Don't like it? Then keep out of the USA
  13. Why not PPP? by rayamor · · Score: 2

    I kinda like the name "Penguin Power Punch". Or the Beo-guin? Or the Slashguin...yeah, I like that one.

  14. Curious as to scale: this vs. an IBM S/390 by laetus · · Score: 2

    Don't know much about these big beasts, but the Cray supercluster being described here outweighs something like an IBM S/390 running Linux by a factor of?

    Choose your scale: ips, ops, ability to compress a 2 1/2 hour DVD to MPEG4 format, etc.

    Serious question.
    ----------------------------------

    --

    "We're sorry, but the website you're trying to reach has been disconnected."
  15. If Shaft were running the company... by G-Man · · Score: 5

    ...he could call it the Bad MuthaCluster.

    (insert rimshot here)

  16. -1, Troll by tstorm · · Score: 5

    Come on Taco, what's next, a story about how a set worker for Episode II accidentally spilled hot grits down Natalie Portman's pants? Christ, why not just rename this Trolldot and be done with it?

  17. That's kind of weird. by hexdef6 · · Score: 3

    Cray making beowolf clusters, huh? Does that seem a little strange to anyone else? I mean, if you are going to buy a Cray, buy a Cray! Of course, I guess being able to say that you have a Cray AND a Beowolf cluster is serious bragging rights

    Jaeger
    www.JohnQHacker.com
    GodHatesCalvinists.com

    1. Re:That's kind of weird. by kilgore_47 · · Score: 4

      I hear these can do an infinite loop in 2.3 seconds!

      --
      ___
      The way to see by faith is to shut the eye of reason. --Ben Franklin
  18. Beowulf clusters... by MarNuke · · Score: 2

    With so many companies selling Bowulf cluster, you got to wonder what makes them so diffence? I mean you have Compaq, VA Linux, Penguin Computers, the mom and pop store up the street and now SGI all doing a wget for the latest beowulf tarball and running scripts to build the package. Sorta pointless really.

    --
    MarNuke
    1. Re:Beowulf clusters... by Bastian · · Score: 2

      True that businesses don't wanna just build the cluster themselves. . . I think it's more than just that they dont want to do it, though. From the eyes of a business, it's not an option. Businesses want security, and they want to know that if the system breaks, they can have an expert show up when they need them. Otherwise, they'd have to pay to have a staffer full-time who knows how to fix a down Cray Beowulf Cluster, which is fiscally stupid. Much wiser to pay the extra money in the first place to have a prepackaged system with a service plan so that you have the experties only when you need it.

  19. Re:Latency by fgodfrey · · Score: 5
    Yes, it is. Which is why it probably won't be connected by ethernet. There are a variety of interconnects such as Myrinet coming on the market now that do something called "OS Bypass". Without too many boring details, basically this allows you to map a page on the local side that "pushes" data to the remote side when you do a write to it. It allows you to send data over the network without doing a call to the OS every time. That is actually what kills you on ethernet, not the fact that ethernet itself is all that slow (especially gigabit).

    That said, at least for the time being, a single memory image system like the Cray T3D/T3E or the Origin line from us (SGI) has better latencies by a lot than Myrinet.

    The interesting thing is that as these "OS Bypass" interconnects develop, they are going to get more and more like a standard memory interconnect in a single memory image system and we'll come full circle. But I digress.....

    --
    Go Badgers! -- #include "std/disclaimer.h"
  20. Beowulf Cluster! by Deven · · Score: 2

    Oh, wow... Could you imagine a Beowulf cluster of these things?

    Oh... nevermind!

    --

    Deven

    "Simple things should be simple, and complex things should be possible." - Alan Kay

  21. Which Cray is Weird? by fm6 · · Score: 2
    I mean, if you are going to buy a Cray, buy a Cray!

    Bear in mind that there have been at least four entities called "Cray". All but one would be perfectly at home building clustered micros.

    1. The original Cray, pioneer of vector supercomputers. Probably the company you're thinking of.
    2. The same company after it branched out into microprocessor-based high-performance computing, system integration, and consulting. This entity not only made MIPS, SPARC, and Alpha-based systems, they resold Sun and SGI workstations.
    3. A loosely-defined entity never completely assimilated by SGI. The only parts of Cray SGI really wanted was Craylink (as much to keep it away from Sun as for themselves) and maybe the compiler software. The rest they more or less ran into the ground.
    4. Tera Computer, which bought the Cray name from SGI, together with the Alpha-based and vector supercomputer lines. SGI had already sold the SPARC-based line to Sun and kept the MIPS-based line for itself.

    __________________

    1. Re:Which Cray is Weird? by Durinia · · Score: 3
      Good lineage post - I'm going to have to nit-pick, though...

      The Origin (MIPS-based) line was never a Cray product. SGI developed it in conjunction with the DASH project at Stanford.

      Also, interestingly enough, Cray #4 is actually very close to Cray #1...through the sale and un-sale to SGI, a lot of the extra stuff was stripped back off. Tera bought the name, yes, but they also brought their employee total from ~50 to ~950.

  22. Re:fp by PovRayMan · · Score: 2

    I made a beowulf cluster too.

    You can read more about my beowulf cluster at this site.

    Slashdot is a good place to spam your own beowulf website!

    ----------

    --
    ----------
    Check out my blackbox styles
  23. I Need Your Help by Fleet+Admiral+Ackbar · · Score: 4
    Well, everyone, I have been trying for a couple of minutes now, and I am ashamed to admit it, but I am completely unable to imagine a Beowulf cluster of these.


    I think perhaps my Beoimpotence may have something to do with watching 75% of that Christopher Lambert "Beowulf" movie. Thank G-d the videotape broke. If it had been a DVD, I might have gone insane.

    --
    Carefree highway, let me slip away on you.
  24. Latency by jmcneill · · Score: 2

    The only thing I wonder about this is latency.. assuming they're interconnected with ethernet, wouldn't latency be _terrible_ compared to a typical multi-processor machine?

  25. Redefining Supercomputer Economics by lupercalia · · Score: 2
    With the advent of Beowulf and other Linux clustering technologies, supercomputing is being redefined. There is more than one way to scale, and clustering is far more economical than traditional big-iron approaches.

    There may always be a market for the old-style supercomputers, but it is almost certainly going to be much smaller in the years to come. This announcement seems like Cray acknowledging that fact, and trying to keep up with the changes so they will still have a market when and if the big-iron approach dies.

  26. Re:Cray is dead. by Durinia · · Score: 3
    Hang on there, cowboy. Perhaps you should look at some data before pronouncing the Cray-ons fit for burial.

    They've won two straight Supercomputing product-of-the-year awards with their SV1 and T3E lines, they have a couple of very highly anticipated (in the HPC community) product releases coming in the next year or two (the MTA-2 and SV2), and, unlike their ex-parent company (SGI), they're actually profitable.

    The "dead for almost a decade" you're thinking of probably is related to the fact that they were sucked into SGI for the last 5 years of the 90s. It's hard to hear anything about "Cray", when nobody calls them "Cray" anymore.

  27. Re:Cray is dead. by Durinia · · Score: 3
    In the early 90s, they got too big. When they started out, HPC was a big GROWING market. Around that time, it started to flatten out, and investors aren't real thrilled when you anticipate growth, and it doesn't show. The market for their machines was (and is) still there, it just wasn't growing nearly as quickly.

    I think the "new" company has much better focus, and knows what its strengths and weaknesses are. Hopefully, with this new Linux/Alpha clustering, they aren't starting to branch out too far again like they did back then.

  28. Would be neat by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2

    to see a non-clustered version of this