Slashdot Mirror


NCSA To Build $53 Million, 13-Teraflop Facility

Quite a few readers submitted news of a distributed system to be built by four U.S. institutions (mostly) out of IBM computers, and paid for with a whopping grant. DoctorWho and november writes: "'The National Science Foundation has awarded $53 million to four U.S. research institutions to build and deploy a distributed terascale facility...' A link to the press release is here." An anonymous reader contributed a link to coverage on Wired, and GreazyMF to one of this story at the New York Times.

162 comments

  1. Re:Why waste money with Bleeding edge? by Derkec · · Score: 1

    It's a $53 million($US) project. Using about a thousand CPUs at say, $1000($US) each, you have an expense of $1million. Clearly, the cost of the CPUs is not going to be where the project will be limited. It's the cost of integration. More processors which are cheaper individually will likely have a higher integration cost and therefore be more expensive, not less. The real question is why they choose Itanium which is really an unproven technology.

  2. Reply to Sig by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If knowledge is power, and power is sexy, then why am I still single??

    int i, knowledge, power, sexy, /.;
    knowledge = power = sexy = 1000;
    /. = FALSE;

    for(;;){

    if ( /. || (/.==sexy) || (/.==knowledge) || (/.==power) )
    printf("How the hell did you get to this point?");

    if (/.==knowledge) printf("/.!=knowledge");

    knowledge--;
    sexy = power = knowledge;
    }

    Sir, you are single because you read slashdot

  3. Re: when I don't understand AIX I say 'When you d by microbob · · Score: 1

    I assume we've never really used AIX?

  4. Re: when I don't understand AIX I say 'When you d by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Sorry, I usually don't respond to people who use "M$" to refer to Microsoft. (You're saying that you aren't a troll? Really?) And if you're really going to waste that beautiful PPC hardware with Linux, you deserve what you get. If Linux is even an option, you don't need that kind of hardware to begin with.

    Why don't you go read some books, maybe get some real experience, and then come back and try responding then? Thanks, buddy!

    -- The_Messenger

  5. Intel's article by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

    Intel had an article on this on their internal web site today; it went on and on about their Intaniums used in this system. But not once did they mention the OS used!! I don't think Intel wants to be associated with Linux.

  6. hardware only quarter of the cost by peter303 · · Score: 2

    Custom systems- whether completely novel, or a
    scale up of a commercial system- always have
    very high overheads.

    First, you have a dedicated hardware and software
    support crew. A production system ammortises
    this over multiple deliveries.

    Second, you are pushing the envelope. Though it
    looks possible on paper, you don't always know
    what won't scale up properly in a cutting edge
    system.

    Third, educational institutions (U of I) charge
    large overheads (@50%) for existing buildings/staff.

    The largest systems just don't get built
    unless the government subsdizes some of the costs.
    If you are lucky, the contracting company learns
    new things to help its commercial side.

    1. Re:hardware only quarter of the cost by Jeff+Knox · · Score: 1

      It is true that hardware is only a fraction of the cost. There is staff cost, building cost (it takes quite a few man hours to build a hundreds to thousands of machines), support contracts, etc.. I agree. You still got to admit IBM or whoever wins the contract is still making a pretty nice profit. Otherwise they would not be in the business. I still wager that you can get the hardware done, and pay Scylld (Donald Becker's company) to do software and support, and whatever cost and do it cheaper than IBM will sell it to you.

      --
      Jeff Knox
  7. Re:Does this have anything by microbob · · Score: 2, Funny

    I do think it is:

    I (gasp) -- LOVE (huuugh) -- THIS (aaarrr) -- COMPANY (shhhhlop)

  8. Re:for comparision by diablovision · · Score: 2

    The machine in Britain would barely rank #48 on top500.org, so what's your point?

    --
    120 characters isn't enough to explain it.
  9. Re:Just to get on with it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You forgot the business about

    6. grits
    7. natalie portman
    8. goatse.cx
    9. complaints about the anti-corporate nature of slashdot posters

    10. jabs at microsoft

    Anything I'm forgetting?

  10. Linux is for kids by ryanvm · · Score: 2
    What surprises me is that although the scientific community has fully embraced the flexibility, power, and openness of Linux; Microsoft continues its efforts to paint it as a "toy" operating system.

    13 teraflops is a pretty big toy.

    1. Re:Linux is for kids by pmz · · Score: 1
      Microsoft continues its efforts to paint [Linux] as a "toy" operating system.

      They can try all they want, but it is a moot effort. The recent Linux GUI desktops are gorgeous. Take away the GUI and you have a hard-core workhorse. Either way these "toy" OSs are pretty damn serious.

      What scientists and engineers appreciate about Linux and always have about UNIX in general is the sheer flexibility and modularity offered. I have never felt Windows offers such flexibility.

    2. Re:Linux is for kids by Nick+Driver · · Score: 1

      That's funny.... I, and most folks in my particular line of work (sysadmins who work for various state and local govts) consider MS to be the toy operating systems, at best they are "consumer-grade", not "commercial-grade" due to the lack of stability, arbitrary and capricious "upgrades" and dubious bugfixes that tend to wreak havoc with already installed apps, forced premature obsolescence... and an exhasperating void where security should be present.

    3. Re:Linux is for kids by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah moderators, you can use mod points to troll too.

    4. Re:Linux is for kids by BorgDrone · · Score: 1, Troll

      Look at XP's new interface ... windows is the toy OS here.
      It wouldn't look bad in a teletubbies episode.

  11. Re:JonKatz, author, Dead at age 14 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    thats hilarious. write a script to post it to every story on slashdot.

  12. Re:Can you? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is a linux cluster we're talking about here. It's in the press release.

  13. Re:From the wired article by starseeker · · Score: 2

    "If Microsoft had offered common external interfaces in the first release of NT, and not those bloated buggy propriety standards years later, they might actually have managed to produce a useable OS that enterprises could then integrate into their existing data centres, rather than boxes that perform tasks in independant installations."

    Ah, but then there would be no incentive in the future to replace those machines. Microsoft, as the subscription based licenses show, cannot merely sell a product and live off the income. That's not how you maximize profit. You keep them paying, and make sure they can't pay anyone else. That's how a monopoly works - you don't play nice with anyone else.

    --
    "I object to doing things that computers can do." -- Olin Shivers, lispers.org
  14. 2003 by cdalemx · · Score: 1

    2003 ibm brings into operation petaflop bluegene computer for a cost of 100 million. .. that would bring the price of a quality 10 terafloop machine into the 1 mill range .. i think that makes for some some interesting posibilitys ...

  15. Duh... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...I hope it runs Linux!

  16. My Prediction by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    This project will flop most terably

    sorry

  17. Re: when I don't understand AIX by billcopc · · Score: 1

    A former co-worker of mine could make an NT server scream. It had uptimes of a year or more.

    I bet he just used VMWare to run Linux on top of it :)

    --
    -Billco, Fnarg.com
  18. Re:Why waste money with Bleeding edge? by Falrick · · Score: 1

    Because most (if not all) of the applications of this super-cluster will probably be research. Scientific research. Scientific research that requires insanely high-precision numbers. 64 bit processors go a long way toward high-precision without using any scary high-precision math libraries. Or the scary high-precision math libraries that you do use can be tweeked for 64 bit processors thusly resulting in faster math. That's the name of the game here. Faster math.

    Beyond that, you really need as high a processing-power to memory-transfer cost ratio as possible. When you are dealing with highly coupled simulations (such as wireless simulations) you pay dearly for cross-processor memory IO.

    --
    something clever
  19. Space enough for your lifetime? by kleenx · · Score: 1

    With 450 Terabytes, we can give almost 7 generations of people music for a lifetime, without repeating...

    Let us examine:
    450 Terabytes
    4.5mb per mp3 (average)

    Thats 100,000,000 Mp3's

    Lets take the average length of music = 3.5 min.
    Thats:
    350000000 Minutes
    5833333.33 Hours
    243055.55 Days
    34722.22 Weeks
    667.73 Years


    Is there any venture capitalists interested in this idea? I think that this could be one great consumer service!!

    1. Re:Space enough for your lifetime? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah but will the Backstreet Boys release enough albums to fill up that time? God, I hope so!

    2. Re:Space enough for your lifetime? by TrollMan+5000 · · Score: 0

      It'll take much less time than that for the RIAA to shut it down!

      Oh well, back to downloading MP3's off Gnutella.

  20. You know what's good about this... by toughguy · · Score: 1

    is that I can't remember the last time I heard the words "microsoft" and "windows 2000" and "cluster" used in the same sentence.
    It's all linux baby!

    1. Re:You know what's good about this... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I can't remember the last time I heard the words "microsoft" and "windows 2000" and "cluster" used in the same sentence.

      I hear those terms in the same sentence all the time. It's not that rare. But in most cases, the word "f**k" is added directly after the word "cluster". :)

  21. Re:OS/software by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Uh....read the subject line. Can't YOU read?

  22. Re:for comparision by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    McKinley is the second generation Itanium CPU which is at least a year away from production. The SGI cluster is using the first generation Itanium CPU (also known as "Merced") which is actually just a technology demonstration, and not a full-blown product from Intel.

  23. On crack, are you? by SharpNose · · Score: 1

    Saying Linux isn't tested nor built for clusters this big is a little like saying that sand isn't meant to go in car windows.

    Linux has ten years and millions of manhours' worth of development and refinement that has gone into it. You wanna do WHAT from scratch?? PASS!

    A cluster is still a machine-by-machine entity, which is the level that the OS is working at; it's the "hooks" you create that facilitate cluster behavior. If you want to write an actual "cluster OS," i.e., one that does not have a context on a single machine, then by all means, go for it, but don't blame these guys for building something by integrating mostly pre-existing parts in order to get the behavior they seek.

    Forgive me for the harsh subject line; it's been a long week!

  24. 13 teraflops? No problem. by stmfreak · · Score: 1

    I should be able to build a single machine this fast for about $1,000 in 10 years. Do you think they'll be done by then?

    --
    These opinions guaranteed or your money back.
  25. Re:A much better comparison by Alien54 · · Score: 2
    if you want to compare, a better match is what NCSA is already running. 1024 processors, over half a TFLOP sustained, a full TFLOP at peak.

    Most people can visualize a hundred or so boxen a lot easier than a thousand or so. It gets a little unreal. So the Brit site with pretty pictures of the system is a good site for those not familiar with the larger systems.

    They have other pretty pictures from their work as well.

    --
    "It is a greater offense to steal men's labor, than their clothes"
  26. Re:users, big money & perspective by Multics · · Score: 1
    Alas, more and more programmers DO have to program highly parallel environments. Since Seymour Cray's untimely departure there are few advances in faster computers at the top end that don't have multiple CPUs in them.

    So since we don't have faster processors (relatively) we will have more and more processors.

    I do not advocate spending Billions on teaching how parallel programming works and how to use PVM and MPI effectively, but I do think it is time that it become a standard theme at the college level CS world. That means that the professors learn how it works and then have access to equipment that allows everyone to have the experience.

    -- Multics

  27. IBM... by powerlinekid · · Score: 1

    If they're IBM machines most likely they're going to use Linux... IBM is making a company wide push to the linux platform.
    Now my only question is... where can i get a beowulf cluster of these babies? That would be sweet...

    --

    can't sleep slashdot will eat me
  28. I wonder if they'd be interested by basscomm · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    in joining my RC-5 cracking team...

    --
    http://crummysocks.com
  29. Re:I'm just glad it's not the NSA... by it's+a+culture+thing · · Score: 5, Interesting

    In fairness they're going to be used for the next generation of particle physics experiments at cern, fermilab, slac and a couple of other places, some bio work on protein folding and a few other things.

    While I'm sure many members of the audience would like to see NSA's hand in here somewhere the processing power is needed since CERN's sending out data from the experiments at 40TB a second (ok, ok I know it gets filtered down to only 100MB/sec)

    Which is the problem, while these 4 systems make a nice addition to the GRID we need more supercomputers!!!

  30. You jerk! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I just spit water all over my monitor

    :)

  31. Re:13-Teraflops.... by Amarok.Org · · Score: 1

    But how do I get the monitor? :)

    --
    -- "Other than that, how was the play Mrs. Lincoln?"
  32. Re:Just to get on with it by garcia · · Score: 1, Offtopic

    11. yeah, it can do all that, but can it get me pr0n?

  33. Re:Why waste money with Bleeding edge? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why not go with 500Mz? Why not 100Mz?
    This is not a new argument and it is not specific to the discussion or something you will not see at BestBuy. Maybe it will go twice as fast and if it takes two weeks to do ??? now it will take a week. At the time I went with an 700Mz AMD but I could have gone with a 500Mz AMD or the new 1 Gz. I picked one that was just right Goldie...

  34. Re:Why waste money with Bleeding edge? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Here's my guess-- With 32 bit pointers, a program cannot hope to access more than 4 Gb of memory (in practice, significantly less). The processors don't have to be leading edge, but they do have to be 64 bit.

  35. Re:Why waste money with Bleeding edge? by gpburdell · · Score: 1

    The current number of procs is 3300. The machines they are using are 16 headed machines and they are installing 1024 machines. That means they are only populating 3 procs in each box. This means that over time they can expand the system to over 52000 procs. Sounds like a good way to go. It will allow expansion with time and money.

  36. Re:users, big money & perspective by WyldOne · · Score: 1
    I do have a problem I am looking to solve with a mini-beowolf. Has to do with real-time music recognition. I've been in the process of setting up a 4 node beowolf (as cheaply as possible) with one controller pc.

    One could also calc PI now on a beowolf now. So yes, I would like to see a beowolf programming class in the college courses. Have is as intro, hardware setup, software setup, programming, advanced topics (weather).

    --

    make Linux, not Microsoft. sin(beast) = -0.809016994374947424102293417182819
  37. Re:Why waste money with Bleeding edge? by bgaz · · Score: 1

    Actually, it would probably cost more per instruction/sec. to use cheaper processors since each one (pair? 8-way?) will need its own motherboard, RAM, etc.

  38. Re:From the wired article by doctor_oktagon · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Always nice to see professionals understand the benefits of open source that no closed source movement could possibly replicate.

    While I am in broad agreement, do not take the announcement of this machine as another blast in the direction of Micro$haft, or another nail in their corporate coffin. If a closed-source system is built correctly, and presents consistent and well-documented interfaces to the outside world, then it can be just as effective.

    Business didn't employ Unix because they could get the source code, they bought it because it followed interface standards, and it was thus easier to get your Unix boxes to talk to your S390s and your Unisys 2200s and your VAXs etc etc etc

    If Microsoft had offered common external interfaces in the first release of NT, and not those bloated buggy propriety standards years later, they might actually have managed to produce a useable OS that enterprises could then integrate into their existing data centres, rather than boxes that perform tasks in independant installations.

  39. See ya by karb · · Score: 1
    "Karb, you've just hit 50 karma despite receiving a -1 commenting on skylarov's predicament. Where are you going next?"

    karb: I'm going to kuro5hin!!

    --

    Jack Valenti and the MPAA are to technology as the Boston strangler is to the woman home alone

  40. Linux by halftrack · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The first thing I looked for was what OS it used. Linux seemed as a good choise, but being no expert I wonder if even Linux can efficiently utilize 1300+ Itanium processors. I realise that Linux (me being a big supporter myself) will have the wanted customizability, but wouldn't making a OS from scratch (Linux-like if that's best) Afterall Linux isn't tested nor built for clusters this big.

    --
    Look a monkey!
    1. Re:Linux by Derkec · · Score: 1

      My gut instinct is that IBM has done some tweaking to the OS. IBM knows about as much as anyone else how to make really, really big systems work. I'm not a huge fan of them, but they have always had a decent portion of their team devoted to big iron.

    2. Re:Linux by Jeff+Knox · · Score: 2, Informative

      You seemed to be slightly confused about how such clusters work. Linux is more than just a good choice, it is the definitive best choice in the supercomputing industry for clusters. If you ever goto the SuperComputing conferences, you would notice how there are many dozens of cluster companies, and they all use linux. Clustering is what supercomputing is all about now.

      Linux does not need to efficiently utilize 1300+ itanium processors. This isnt a singular machine, it's a cluster. The linux kernel needs to be able to handle its individual node (consiting of a couple processors or so) efficiently, not all the processors. The distribution and parallelization is handled by other software, such as message passing interfaces like MPI. To be honest, linux is tested on many clusters with this many processors and whatnot, and it has been customized and hardened for use in large magnatude clusters. But like I said, it really isnt a kernel thing, its the other software in the package that controls distribution of processing payloads to the individual nodes.

      Building an operating system for scracth is just a bad idea for something like this. They are not exactly something that can be built a couple weeks.Look at all the other OS projects out there besides Linux. Even with a few dozen constributors, alot of been years in the making, and are not any where near the level of linux, or an OS that could be used in such a fashion. Basically, it would take a very long time to build an OS from scratch that would do all the things necessary, and have the stability requirements for such a project.

      --
      Jeff Knox
  41. Re:I wonder... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What I want to know is how long it will take it to deduce the existance for rice pudding

  42. Re:Just to get on with it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    I read the guidelines. I'll mod down when I think it really needs to be modded down. Your post wasn't worth a point. Someone else's was. And I read ACs at 0 before I ever got mods because I didn't like that there were so few points for mods to give out that mods couldn't rate enough good ACs even to 1.

    woof.

    AC so the mods I gave here don't disappear

  43. Don't be so hasty to slam AIX by Nick+Driver · · Score: 1

    I used to think AIX was a lame flavor of Unix... until after I'd been the sysadmin for 5 years for a govt organization that runs a mixture of AIX, Solaris, HP-UX, Linux, *BSD, and NT. I used to prefer Solaris, but now AIX is my favorite. It's the most stable by far, and performance is top notch for the hardware it runs upon. True, it's got its quirks and wierdnesses, but they all do. You just get used to them over time. The AIX LVM/JFS and memory management is the finest of all.

  44. Time and Space don't like you either by karb · · Score: 5, Funny
    From wired:

    to eliminate the tyranny of time and space limitations.

    This time and space flaming has got to end. Granted, time and space have a monopoly on time and space, but it is a *benevolent* monopoly, which is ok with every legislative body in the world except the EU. Time and space have prevailed as the primary purveyors of time and space through quality, perseverance, and generous donations to any political party that would take their money. So, lay off, slashdot!

    --

    Jack Valenti and the MPAA are to technology as the Boston strangler is to the woman home alone

    1. Re:Time and Space don't like you either by grammar+fascist · · Score: 2

      This time and space flaming has got to end.

      No kidding. If this keeps up, it could spell the end of innovation as we know it. Next we'll have the EU hauling time and space off to court, saying that they tried to extend their monopolies into other markets through predatory practices and hiding their API's. (They'll be saying things like, "We didn't even KNOW about relativity until the 20th century, for crying out loud! Where were those API's?")

      On the other hand, with a little competition, I might finally have enough time to finish my work and space on my desk to keep all this idiotic paperwork...

      --
      I got my Linux laptop at System76.
  45. Re: when I don't understand AIX I say 'When you d by Amarok.Org · · Score: 1
    While the original post was 90% Troll, and my guess is that he's never even seen a non-x86 UNIX box, he brings up a good point.
    I find this to be the monkey-on-the-typewriter syndrome - through enough uneducated opinions out at the world, and at least one will eventually have some validity.
    We have a "small" RS/6000 cluster here where I work ("small" as in only $900k), and ever since we switched platforms from Solaris, we've had nothing but problems. AIX is probably the most different of any of the certified UNIXes.
    Absolutely. It *is* different. Why? Because IBM has *learned* something from the last 20 years, where Solaris really hasn't. Sure, there've been improvements, but Sun has tried to stay as much of a "pure" Unix as they can. IBM, right or wrong, throws a lot of that out the window to say - This is how we think it should be done. And in most cases, other OS compatibility aside, it works better than what it replaced.
    IBM likes to take established practices and break them over its knees -- for instance, why the fuck does IBM's JDK make you run shell scripts in "$INSTALL/sh" in order to use the executables in "$INSTALL/bin?" Every other JDK on earth allows you to directly run "$INSTALL/bin/javac," but, no, IBM has to be different.
    I don't think IBM does things differently just for the sake of being different - but in cases like this (of which there are MANY), IBM *does* need a sever beating with a clue stick.
    The single biggest problem is that AIX is dead fucking last on most commercial software houses' list of platforms to port to, right after Amiga and Game Boy Advanced.
    Ouch! But... not too far off base. In many cases, though, this is similar to the Mac vs. M$ debate... how many word processors do you need? How many web servers? Admittedly, things like Oracle and the various app servers out there are more critical, but the point is the same. There are enough AIX boxes out there, and enough business, that the important stuff *does* eventually get ported. No, AIX isn't the answer for every app... nor is Solaris, Linux, MS, MacOS, etc either.
    As much as I hate to recommend GNU/Linux for enterprise computing, I'd much rather run Linux on these suckers than AIX.
    Without questioning your judgement *or* experience (ok, maybe just a little), I would love to see a multi-terabyte database system running on Linux, with easily reconfigurable disk subsystems, etc, with fast and easily available support.

    Again, no offense, but AIX is a very powerful, very stable OS. It is, as you've pointed out, non-standard (even for POSIX and SYSV) and difficult to administer for untrained admins. Put your average Solaris admin on an AIX box, and he'll be lost. There's LOTS of stuff that's different and very proprietary. But... most of that "stuff" is what makes AIX so valuable as an enterprise class OS.
    The fact is that these days, unless you're a mission-critical type of shop, x86 hardware kicks ass.
    Bingo! Am I going to lay my professional reputation on x86 hardware and Linux for mission critical apps? Not yet. There's the old saying, "No one ever got fired for buying IBM." Well... except maybe Sun employees. :)

    Well, that was quite the rant, wasn't it? Seriously, most people who bash AIX have never used it - and those who have used it, usually came from another Un*x and are pissed because things are "different". Not worse, just different. Mission critical app? Give me AIX over Solaris or HP anyday. Budget constraints? I'm going with the x86 stuff and Linux.

    --
    -- "Other than that, how was the play Mrs. Lincoln?"
  46. yeah but can it... by sforman · · Score: 2, Funny

    "Scientists involved in the project said the facility would help researchers understand the origins of the universe, cure cancer, unlock secrets of the brain, predict tornadoes, and save lives in an earthquake" yeah, but can it find me pr0n?

    1. Re:yeah but can it... by The+Real+Andrew · · Score: 0

      You need help finding porn? Good grief man just sign up for a hotmail account and get all the porn delivered to you by M$

  47. Re:13-Teraflops.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If you want a big stool, just have a large meal and wait about 24 hours.

  48. It could be built for less than half that cost. by Jeff+Knox · · Score: 1

    $53 million for a cluster to provide that power is dramatically less then it would cost from a vector outfit like Tera, NCR, Fujitsu, SGI, Cray, etc. etc. However, you can get more bang for the buck. I priced building a cluster, with gigabit switches and all that, for 13 teraflops around 8 months ago, to be around 20-25 million. Prices on processors have dramatically dropped since then. Like mentioned on a previous post, use cheaper processors, Itaniums dont have the price/performance ratio a Athlon 1.4GHZ, or a Intel P3 would have. Sometimes using the newest technology isnt always worth it.

    --
    Jeff Knox
  49. It works! by fobbman · · Score: 2

    "Quite a few readers submitted news of a distributed system to be built by four U.S. institutions..."

    Looks like our "Slashdot Distributed Story Submission" (SDSS) is working quite nicely.

  50. Re: when I don't understand AIX I say 'When you d by Amarok.Org · · Score: 1
    That's just my point -- we aren't running multi-terabyte databases. We have no need for the horsepower that RS/6000 provides -- so why put up an OS that is a thorn in our side?
    A valid point, indeed. Unless, of course you're *also* running multi-terabyte databases, need the horsepower, and don't want to have a mixed-OS shop for your other, smaller applications.
    That is true, the vast majority of people bashing AIX haven't used it -- much like most Linux-bashers have never used Linux, and most NT-bashers can't afford NT. :-)
    Wait... we're supposed to pay for NT? :-O
    ...but there are some aspects of AIX that differ so much from standard UNIX fare that I can't imagine what could have possibly prompted their development.
    Getting a bit off topic, but out of curiousity... what aspects?
    However, I have a real problem with Blue zealots who seem to think that AIX is without flaw
    Zealots of any persuasion are generally unindicative of the true proponents - and are generally worth ignoring.
    But you are clearly not one of these zealots, and I think we agree on most things: Linux isn't a replacement for UNIX, AIX is a good but different UNIX platform, and most AIX-bashers are morons. ;-) Right?
    Good summary. :)

    No, I'm not a zealot. AIX does, however, provide me a nice comfortable living... it can't be all bad. :)

    --
    -- "Other than that, how was the play Mrs. Lincoln?"
  51. Re:OS/software by zzen · · Score: 1
    That's NOT the OS software they're using; they're using Linux. Globus is NOT an OS. It's an add-on, and one that's been around for years and years now.


    You mean the Globe is not an OS? Think about it for a while - you can set your own enviroment in which you operate and it is a complex system.

    ...and now they will tell me the Globe is only an add-on... What's next? It's not a bug, it's a feature??!!
  52. wow by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Kind of blows your little beowulf cluster out of the water huh?

  53. I wonder... by SGDarkKnight · · Score: 1

    how long it will take this thing to decode on data block from seti@home?

    --

    ...A no smoking section in a restaurant is like having a no peeing section in a swimming pool...
  54. Terraflop..... by Papa+Legba · · Score: 1

    We REALLY need to frind a different term for measuring floating point operations. Anyone from the country, or has spent time their, can tell you that a cowflop, sometimes shortened to just flop, is the results after a cow is finished with the grass it ate. I see the term terraflop and frankly I reach for my boots figurring this is going to be a big one....

    --
    Papa Legba come and open the gate
  55. Can you? by Mononoke · · Score: 1, Offtopic
    Imagine a Beow....

    Aww, shit. nevermind.

    --
    NetInfo connection failed for server 127.0.0.1/local
    1. Re:Can you? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      H0 h0 h0! You just can't post a cluster story without hearing this shit.. Its like a bad laugh track .

  56. Re: when I don't understand AIX I say 'When you d by macdaddy · · Score: 2
    Yes I've seen a "non-x86 UNIX box" or two in my day. We have RS/6k's here as well as some x86 Linux boxes. I also have an Ultra30 sitting next to me in my office that isn't being used at the moment. I have PPC Linux machines next to me (and a couple at home) as well as a handful of Sparcs at home (Sparc1, 5 IPCs, etc...). I use x86 Linux machines for my contract work. I had an old SGI but I sold it. I've dealt with IRIX.

    I think any OS can be an entreprise-level OS in the hands of the right person (even M$ Windows and OS/2). A former co-worker of mine could make an NT server scream. It had uptimes of a year or more. Very stable, very reliable---in his hands. We had a similar box for in-house purposes. Almost the same hardware. It went up and down like a damned yo-yo----in our hands. A similarly gifted AIX person can do similar things. The average Joe can't though. The average Joe can't make termcaps work right in AIX let along secure the box. I'd love to run PPC Linux on our 6k's. It would really make those boxes scream. Anything is faster than AIX on those boxes.

    I would personally love to have the time to get really good Solaris experience. Sure I probably wouldn't use it in the end unless I became the admin of a number of Solaris boxes but still I'd like the experience. I'd like to shadow a good Solaris admin for a couple weeks.

    BTW, the original post was 90% humor and 10% sarcasm.

  57. Why waste money with Bleeding edge? by ka9dgx · · Score: 2, Insightful
    It's going to be obsolete as soon as they get it working, so why go with bleeding edge (expensive) hardware? Why can't they crank it back a bit, use cheap 1Ghz processors, and have 3-4 times as many of them? It seems they could get twice the bang for the buck that way.

    --Mike--

    1. Re:Why waste money with Bleeding edge? by Saeger · · Score: 1
      If you want to see bleeding edge tech bleed onto your desktop sooner, you should thank the early adopters who overpay for that temporary edge.

      So why complain?

      --
      Power to the Peaceful
    2. Re:Why waste money with Bleeding edge? by HugeMidget · · Score: 0

      Do you honestly think they will be paying full price for each of the processors?

    3. Re:Why waste money with Bleeding edge? by MattEvans · · Score: 1

      Myrinet (on a per-node basis) is actually a more significant cost than the CPU's, for many clustering projects. It runs around $2,000 per machine. Furthermore, the balance between fast processors/many processors depends strongly on the problem at hand.

      When you attempt to distribute a problem (a non-trivial problem, one that isn't embarassingly parallel), you have to strike a balance between the load on a single processor (or single SMP machine), and the overhead associated with message passing. Many research groups who build their own clusters go through extensive analysis of their particular problems to find the appropriate "sweet spot". For this machine, which will no doubt be used for many dissimilar projects, I don't know how they determined how much per-node power they needed. With a $53million grant, I bet they just went with the simple solution: as much as they can get :).

      My point is just that the assumption that the CPU is the biggest expense is erroneous when dealing with specialized networking equipment like Myrinet, and that trading processor power for numbers isn't always a good bet.

  58. A much better comparison by Grape+Shasta · · Score: 1

    If you want to compare, a better match is what NCSA is already running. 1024 processors, over half a TFLOP sustained, a full TFLOP at peak.

    --

    "I am a cipher, a cipher, wrapped in an enigma, smothered in secret sauce" -Jimmy James
  59. NCSA wants to figure out the meaning of life by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    give me a 13-teraflop system i'll use it to play games just like the NCSA does.

  60. Re:users, big money & perspective by diablovision · · Score: 2

    Interesting points, but you do have to remember that massively parallel systems aren't for the masses anyway, and normal programmers don't wrestle with these "0.0001%" of problems that demand this kind of power. The fact is that those small percentage of problems aren't always trivial theoretical problems that don't have impact on our lives, but are more often things of practical importance to scientists and the military. Nuclear reaction simulations (both weapons and energy), protein folding, DNA sequencing, molecular simulations...all very very intense computing problems that demand powerful computers to produce better and better simulations.

    We need more programmers to program the machines? Maybe. This is an important but niche market, and throwing billions into education so that kids with bachelor's can call themselves super-computer programmers isn't the answer. The systems are already programmed by brilliant people researching these problems, doctorates all around. This isn't work for your average 15 year old 3r33t haXor, you know?

    --
    120 characters isn't enough to explain it.
  61. The NCSA has come a long way. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They've come a long way from being a place where people like Marc Andreesen can steal Intellectual Property.

  62. They should use SETI@Home by Uttles · · Score: 1

    Then maybe the government would discover some intelligent life, because they obviously don't have any.

    --

    ~ now you know
  63. WIndows XP by xintelexx · · Score: 0, Troll

    Now I wonder if we will be able to run Windows XP Luna interface without a problem. - Not a Troll ! Does anyone miss the hardcore command shell days, I remember BBSing, being a SySop, now those were the days!
    Maybe they will put this system to good use, like finding cures, mapping human DNA, or the million other positive things. But you have to ask your self, I live in 2 bed room apartment and my BGE (gas and electric) is almost $200 a month, I dare not imagine what the bill will be for this thing !

    1. Re:WIndows XP by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      1. You are a newbie, and thus weren't around in "them old days."
      2. No one misses the old days. Slow hardware? No thanks. 2D gamimg? Um, maybe not. And most importantly, THE INABILITY TO STORE 2GB OF FULL COLOR PR0N ON MY DESKTOP? Are you INSANE, man?

      -- The_Messenger

    2. Re:WIndows XP by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, there's this little thing called Linux that some of the ppl around here are finally catching onto. Yeah, you can run GUI stuff in it, but the CLI is -far- more powerful than anything DOS ever was. Just imagine, for a second, an OS designed for geeks by geeks...

    3. Re:WIndows XP by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Yeah, well there's this little thing called UNIX that predates Linux by twenty years, and DOS by five. Linux completely ripped UNIX off, ann thus should by given no credit for whatver coolness it may have.

      -- The_Messenger

    4. Re:WIndows XP by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      You are a newbie, and thus weren't around in "them old days."
      You are a wannabe that spends more time and energy on the APPEARANCE of being a geek then just realizing that you like and use geek toys. Pathetic l00z3r. I bet if you were around in the BBS prime days you were 733t

      Hey, I bet you also check other linux sites to get their opinion and take on matters then parrot it in quotes in such... man, you are soooo cool! Please come code my mission critical systems, mr. 733t looser boy! If you slam M$ and say Linux enough you might be even cooler

  64. Does this have anything by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Funny

    to do with anything? Ballmer is now Hitler? - "I love this company!!!"

    1. Re:Does this have anything by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ..you forgot the "I have four words..."

      Ballmer is an ass.

    2. Re:Does this have anything by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      test test ooo

  65. OS/software by clinko · · Score: 1, Troll
    1. Re:OS/software by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He didn't SAY it was the OS- he said it was the software, which it is.
      Can't you people read a ONE-LINE post before you flame it???

    2. Re:OS/software by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

      That's NOT the OS software they're using; they're using Linux. Globus is NOT an OS. It's an add-on, and one that's been around for years and years now.

  66. Re:for comparision by ajiva · · Score: 2, Informative

    Big deal, the article claims its going to use McKinley based Itanium processors. Which are at least 2 years away from production. Plus they are using 1300 processors, while the one in Britain only has 152 processors. Quite a bit of a difference if you ask me :)

  67. AIX by macdaddy · · Score: 2, Funny

    Let's just hope it doesn't run AIX. 'When you don't understand Unix, you probably run AIX.

    1. Re:AIX by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It will be running linux (redhat 7.0, or 7.1 with the 2.4 Kernel).

    2. Re:AIX by Amarok.Org · · Score: 1

      And you would prefer what business class OS with an LVM, JFS, on-the-fly kernel reconfiguration, and fantastic (albeit expensive) support?

      --
      -- "Other than that, how was the play Mrs. Lincoln?"
  68. Re:for comparision by robinp · · Score: 1

    the "cosmology machine" is small fry compared to the Cray T3e we have in manchester (www.csar.cfs.ac.uk)

    and that's our old machine...

  69. Looks like Someone just won the RSA award by skyknytnowhere · · Score: 1

    but it probably won't pay their first loan payment on that behemoth. skye

  70. Re:horsepower by akhaksho · · Score: 1

    We're using a cluster very similar to this to run our wall.

  71. Spare CPU cycles for a sociopathic meglomaniac? by graveyhead · · Score: 3, Funny
    I wonder if they would let me run my Illuminati(tm) software. I stayed up all night last night, coding like a maniac on speed, and have come up with something pretty special:
    1. Win the RSA factoring challenge, put the money in a swiss bank account, and feed Illuminati(tm) back the account number.
    2. Use genetic programming to predict the stock market, making billions of dollars from the $500,000 won in the factoring challenge.
    3. Buy and sell peoples lives, based on loyalty to myself and Illuminati(tm).
    4. Voila, world domination
    Pinky will probably screw it up, as usual.
    --
    std::disclaimer<std::legalese> sig=new std::disclaimer; sig->dump(); delete sig;
  72. Re: when I don't understand AIX I say 'When you d by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Without questioning your judgement *or* experience (ok, maybe just a little), I would love to see a multi-terabyte database system running on Linux, with easily reconfigurable disk subsystems, etc, with fast and easily available support.
    That's just my point -- we aren't running multi-terabyte databases. We have no need for the horsepower that RS/6000 provides -- so why put up an OS that is a thorn in our side? Please note that I qualified my statement by saying that I don't like to recommend Linux for enterprise computing -- IMNSHO, Linux's poor scalabilty, lack of clear project vision, and lack of professional polish make it unsuitable for the type of work that Real Machines are used for. You will find no bigger proponent of using commercial UNIX in stead of Linux than myself. But because of hardware costs and softare availabilty, I truly believe that Linux is now an excellent solution for low-end server platforms where industrial strength, reliability, and uptime are not called for.
    Well, that was quite the rant, wasn't it? Seriously, most people who bash AIX have never used it - and those who have used it, usually came from another Un*x and are pissed because things are "different".
    That is true, the vast majority of people bashing AIX haven't used it -- much like most Linux-bashers have never used Linux, and most NT-bashers can't afford NT. :-)

    I have no problem with most of what IBM's done, but there are some aspects of AIX that differ so much from standard UNIX fare that I can't imagine what could have possibly prompted their development. And when you change standard UNIX interfaces, it becomes more than an HR problem -- why do you think it takes so long to port to AIX?

    I think RS/6000 is a very fine platform, and differences aside, AIX is a fine UNIX implementation. However, I have a real problem with Blue zealots who seem to think that AIX is without flaw. But you are clearly not one of these zealots, and I think we agree on most things: Linux isn't a replacement for UNIX, AIX is a good but different UNIX platform, and most AIX-bashers are morons. ;-) Right?

    Thank you for your reply.

    -- The_Messenger

  73. Linux doesn't have to scale by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative
    Linux doesn't have to efficently use all 1300 processors - they're not even going to try and do that. All Linux has to do is efficently manage one CPU. (Well, for space concerns the nodes are probably going to be dual-proc SMP machines...). You're thinking of something called Single-System-Image (SSI), and IMHO it's the wrong approach to take with this many machines.

    This is not a big SMP machine - the kernel does not have to manage all 1300 CPU's at once. Instead, there will be 1300 copies of Linux running (in the long run, you don't really want the OS involved much anyway)

    It totally depends on exactly what they'll run on it, but based on what's currently running on the NCSA machines the concerns will be a high speed, low latency network (which they got in Myrinet - note that I didn't say cheap) and a good MPI implemenation to take advantage of it. Both LAM and MPICH have Myrinet-aware implementations, and they're both pretty fast.

    1. Re:Linux doesn't have to scale by gpburdell · · Score: 1

      I have visited the Shell cluster in Haag and it was 1024 dual CPU machines running Linux. The new cluster will be based on 16 processor machines. They 16 headed machines use a custom IBM chipset that allows SMP operation.

  74. Re:From the wired article by MOMOCROME · · Score: 3

    while open source is useful here, you shouldn't use this argument as a justification for the GPL. the BSD license would more than suffice for these purposes.

    The GPL seriously undermines the commercial viability of software.

  75. Re:for comparision by Grape+Shasta · · Score: 1

    Hmmm, take a look at this Slashdot story, also on today's front page. It looks like somebody just built the first Itanium cluster. That's really impressive if the chip doesn't exist for another two years...

    --

    "I am a cipher, a cipher, wrapped in an enigma, smothered in secret sauce" -Jimmy James
  76. Re:horsepower by whovian · · Score: 1

    Since my suggestions are not welcome, I am leaving slashdot. I would have figured Troll -1, but off topic??? Adios.

    --
    To-do List: Receive telemarketing call during a tornado warning. Check.
  77. Re:Wasted by it's+a+culture+thing · · Score: 1

    Very little of the system time is likely to go to waste. I'd say a likely down time is only a couple of % since there's always a long queue waiting to get on and there's a lot of stuff being done at the moment in this area. Or to put it another way - it's not going to waste

    If you look at the details of the system it doesn't handle email or web traffic, just physics programs which will be submitted through a single node which then distributes it out to the 128 processors so there wont be any user data on the machines just temp files from the data being run on each processor.

    Backing up data is likely to occur through the huge amount of storage currently being purchased for the UK-GRID and tape. What is there to protect? Monte Carlo simulations of cosmology experiments? this isn't personal or corporate data, one bogus result is unlikely to throw the experiment off.

    Anyway, this is only one of a few new systems in the UK which are getting announced at the moment, so although they aren't as large as the ones being *talked* about in the states they're here, now and working while it'll take 2 years before the american ones come online.

  78. Re:13-Terflops of... by Unknown+Bovine+Group · · Score: 1
    What exactly will they be using the 13 Teraflops to calculate and the 450 Terabytes to store? Mayhaps Carnivore or Eschelon have found a home.

    Yeah that's why they're making all the details so public. >SMACK<

    On the other hand, think Contact: government philosophy: "Why buy one when you can get two at twice the price."

    --
    m00.
  79. Hmm by Cytlid · · Score: 1

    ... and I will be using this cluster for my distributed.net client...

    --
    FLR
  80. Re:Just to get on with it by Captain+Salad · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    wait, there's a couple more...

    12. Katz = = fucktard.
    13. Taco = = homo.
    14. Timothy = = tool.
    15. Stephen King, author, is dead at 54.

    ...and my own personal favorite

    16. The Linux Gay Conspiracy

    --


    frist prosts r kewl
  81. Re:Deep Thought ? by BorgDrone · · Score: 1

    The HitchHikers Guide to the Galaxy is a couple of years behind, technology has advanced since then, even my pocket calculator can answer that question.

    it's 42.

  82. tax dollars by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    cheaper is better, like you said, better spent on research than on liscensing... however, why are my and others' tax dollars funding this at all? That is wrong. Don't confuse that with support or not support, it is different. I would contribute voluntarily to this, however any hypocrit that says, "Well, I like this so it is good" is the same scum that later bitches about some OTHER program that they "don't like" yet is tax funded.

    If you like it then you can bloody well fund it on your own (I would), but violence and the threat of violence to obtain your cash flow is called extortion, theft or taxing.

  83. horsepower by whovian · · Score: 0, Offtopic


    How about getting these things to drive those high-resolution walls?

    --
    To-do List: Receive telemarketing call during a tornado warning. Check.
  84. Re:Just to get on with it by Captain+Salad · · Score: 2, Funny

    Modding down an AC is like kicking a baby in the face.

    --


    frist prosts r kewl
  85. Not just NCSA by kst · · Score: 1
    The title on this article is a bit misleading. As the press release says, NCSA is just one of the four institutions involved in this project. The others are SDSC, Argonne National Laboratory, and Caltech's CACR (Center for Advanced Computing Research).

    NCSA is certainly an important part of this partnership, but they're neither the only part nor the lead site.

  86. Globus/gnutella by BroadbandBradley · · Score: 2

    so if there's a distibuted client app that also allows for file sharing, everyone could download it and we'd all have supercomputers. I saw 40TB of content on LimeWire yesterday, granted it was mostly music and not scientific data. but after decoding a music stream and loading a webpage, what do you do with all those extra clockcycles anyhow? how about providing a globus interface in the major Linux Distros, so you could subscribe to the grid along with system updates and supoort options. sure it'd piss off my ISP but what the hell do I care?

    1. Re:Globus/gnutella by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Have you ever INSTALLED globus? I'd rather rewrite the kernel in Cobol than install it again. It was the toughest install I ever had to do.

  87. Re:Just to get on with it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    anyone moderating down a coward is a complete moron
    first read the faq, you are supposed to promote first
    second, cowards are already at 0 ! noone reads them !

    thank you

  88. Re:This is the future of the Internet by doctor_oktagon · · Score: 1

    ... yes, but you'll need a Microsoft Passport account to gain access!

  89. Weather forecast by halftrack · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I've heard that the algorithms to calculate tomorrows weather exists, but todays super-computers uses two days to calculate it ("And yesterdays weather was: %s" % (calculate_weather())" Will this do it? If so, they'll need two, one for the weather and one for all the stuff they planned to use this for.

    --
    Look a monkey!
    1. Re:Weather forecast by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The mathematical algorithms to calculate tomorrow's weather have existed for decades. Computers have been used to forecast the weather since the late 1960's. One of the many problems in forecasting the weather has been the lack of suficient computational power to adequately resolve the small-scale features repsonsible for generating rain/showers/thunderstorms (the weather everyone cares about). The new NCSA cluster will help by providing researchers/forecasters a system on which their codes run faster and with higher resolution. Of course, one of the biggest forecasting problems is observing the atmosphere to get a good idea what the initial state (the weather at time = now) is. With less than 100 upper-air observations for all of North America - typically about 400 km spacing - being used to provide the initial data, and everyone wanting to know if and when it will rain on them personally 12 hours to 5 days out, how can a forecaster hope to get anywhere close to the correct answer from a computer model? One solution is to make many forecasts using the same forecast model, but with varying initial conditions (all close to the observed atmosphere). Now the same forecast needs to be made many times over! This results in a need for even more computational power than what this system will provide. So, to answer your question. No. This new computer will not provide a system that will perfectly forecast tomorrow's weather today. However, it is a step in the right direction for improving the forecasts. Now, if only the forecast models can be told (correctly) what the initial state of the atmosphere is that they are trying to predict in the first place....

  90. Yeehaw, lookit all them teraflops on that box by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...and Imagine a Beowolf Cluster of 'em!!!

  91. Myrinet by Jeff+Knox · · Score: 1

    Myrinet is not cheap. If you look at their prices, 16 cards, and a 16 port hub, will set you back around 30grand. Assuming dual proc systems, thats only a 32 processor node. :P It however has killer bandwith (254MegaBYTES/second (1.96Gbps), and extremely low latency makes me drool). The klat (i think thats what it was) cluster that used the genetic algorithm to design the network, and a 3-4 cheap nics in each machine, and wirespeed switches, was a pretty good idea. Semi low cost (20 dollar nics, and the switch), and the speed rivalled gigabit solutions, for ALOT lower cost.

    --
    Jeff Knox
    1. Re:Myrinet by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, you can do cheap network cards and get good bandwidth, but you can't get approach Myrinet's latency with $20 cards...

  92. Re: when I don't understand AIX by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    naw, just installing the service pack makes it scream "INACESSIBLE_BOOT_DEVICE"

  93. users, big money & perspective by Multics · · Score: 2, Interesting
    Is it just me or does it strike you too that NSF is very busy funding the next big iron but not funding initiatives to teach the masses how to program massively parallel systems?

    Every cluster I know of (around 20 systems, 14 sites) is not for want of cycles, they need programmers to write the codes to eat the cycles. There are not enough small 'education' clusters to allow everyone the education & experience.

    Even just $1m of that could be much better spent in education instead of feeding the 0.0001% of computer problems that currently need this class of hardware.

    -- Multics

  94. This is the future of the Internet by pieterh · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Seems to me... fast networking, collaborative computing, peer-to-peer information sharing, autonomous virus communities. We're heading towards a massive parallel global computing system controlled by no single entity.

    1. Re:This is the future of the Internet by Brazilian+Geek · · Score: 3, Informative

      We're heading towards a massive parallel global computing system controlled by no single entity

      Unless, maybe, it's controlled by MS... Take a look at these two articles on The Register:

      - MS poised to switch Windows file systems with Blackcomb
      - How Microsoft's file system caper could wrongfoot the DoJ

      --
      All browsers' default homepage should read: Don't Panic...
  95. Re:I'm just glad it's not the NSA... by BorgDrone · · Score: 2, Funny


    if the NSA would build such a computer, you think they would announce it to the world ?

    it may already be out there ...
    </paranoid>

  96. for comparision by Alien54 · · Score: 4, Informative
    For comparision there is the Cosmology Machine in Britain, which among other things consists of an integrated cluster of 128 Ultra-SparcIII processors and a 24-processor SunFire, and has a total of 112 Gigabytes of RAM and 7 Terabytes of data storage. With all of this power it can perform up to 456 billion arithmetic operations in a second (228 billion floating point and 228 billion integer operations)

    This is impressive, but the nasa machine will blow it out of the water.

    --
    "It is a greater offense to steal men's labor, than their clothes"
    1. Re:for comparision by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      ...and 7 Terabytes of data storage.

      When it comes to supercomputers, Terabytes are crap. The supercomputer (actually 2) powering the Subaru Telescope in Hawaii has 5 PETAbytes alone, on top of a multi-terabyte (dunno number as it's constantly being upgraded) RAID array.

  97. From the front line.. by cryptomancer · · Score: 1
    Lemme tell ya, it was exciting to be in the room with the press conference. Well, that's a bit misleading, because many of the institutions participating in the DTF (Distributed Terascale Facility) were holding the press conference over the Grid, via the AccessGrid, with Intel an IBM and their invited press people dialed in over the phone. I'm at ANL, where the AG was born.. if before I started here. ;)

    Actually, I didn't stick around for as much of the press conference, 'cuz I had WORK to do! Many press releases on the DTF make it sound like it's one cluster in one lab's basement, and that ain't right. As importantly as looking at the distributed nature of the project, look at what each institution is contributing- this isn't a homogeneous wide-area cluster. I don't have a big part in it, and my internship is almost over, but I'd like to think that what I've been working on for over a year may become well-known soon. So yeah, while the press conference was going on I was in the next room working on enhancing a visualization library to work on tiled displays, (which has been news on /. recently. Too bad few managed to find our work here- We gots neet stuph).

    Now an obligatory Oh, puh-leeze! RC-5 cracking? Quake? We've already seen Quake3 in the CAVE. Listening to conversations at the reception, there are much cooler things coming..

    Cryptomancer, working the magic on code

    --
    Yes, we understand these tags always apply: fud, dupe, typo, slashdotted, topic name
  98. Re:From the wired article by o_kenway · · Score: 1


    Yes - using linux is all very fine and well but it has some nasty suprises. For example on RedHat 6 upgrading to the next version of Sun's JDK (in this case 1.3) requires an upgrade to a new version of certain libraries and the recompiling of most of the software on the system.

    While this is fine on a home hobbyist machine it is not very good if you have multiple users and especially not if you are selling computer time to companies. And why do you need Java 1.3 you ask? You need it because the Globus CoG toolkit needs it.

  99. Do the math... by phr1 · · Score: 2

    2**128 = 3.4e38
    13 teraflops = 1e13 instructions per second

    Assume 1 trial decryption per instruction
    which is of course unrealistically low.

    You still need 3.4e25 seconds or about 1e18 years to search that keyspace.

    Sorry, no cigar...

    1. Re:Do the math... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Assuming a brute-force search. The NSA are almost certain to know some shortcuts, particularly since they designed the S-boxes for the most widely used encryption scheme....

  100. Re:Wasted by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This machine isn't allowed to be used to email, mp3s, etc. as it is a dedicated science machine. You have to have a registered account with NSF-sponsored allocations committees, and your login is monitored (you are given a set amount of CPU-hours to use on the machine, and that's all you can use -- no dawdling). As with most nationwide-allocated research machines, there is a long line of scientists wanting to use this machine. If there were any idle processes, I'm sure SETI@home would like it. =)

  101. Yes, but... by baptiste · · Score: 2, Funny

    will it be running the NCSA server software or will they finally switch to Apache? ;) ;)

  102. Re: when I don't understand AIX I say 'When you d by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    While the original post was 90% Troll, and my guess is that he's never even seen a non-x86 UNIX box, he brings up a good point. We have a "small" RS/6000 cluster here where I work ("small" as in only $900k), and ever since we switched platforms from Solaris, we've had nothing but problems. AIX is probably the most different of any of the certified UNIXes. IBM likes to take established practices and break them over its knees -- for instance, why the fuck does IBM's JDK make you run shell scripts in "$INSTALL/sh" in order to use the executables in "$INSTALL/bin?" Every other JDK on earth allows you to directly run "$INSTALL/bin/javac," but, no, IBM has to be different.

    The single biggest problem is that AIX is dead fucking last on most commercial software houses' list of platforms to port to, right after Amiga and Game Boy Advanced. When we originally did the platform switch, we had to roll back to a previous version of Oracle because 8i hadn't made it to AIX yet. We had to stick with old versions of iPlanet Web Server (which is fucking awful to begin with, but that's the subject of another post) because IBM couldn't provide Netscape with a JVM that would pass their QA requirements.

    As much as I hate to recommend GNU/Linux for enterprise computing, I'd much rather run Linux on these suckers than AIX.

    However, this is a moot point, because we'll probably be switching to an all-PC machine room (yes, running GNU/Linux) within five years. We developers have grown pretty fucking tired of a development server with only 1GB of RAM (It's running Oracle! And DB2! And about thirty instances of iPlanet! It's about to fall over, night and day), which management won't upgrade because another gig costs $10k. If we switch to cheapo Intel hardware, we can buy twice as many boxes, load every box with 4GB of RAM, and still save money. The fact is that these days, unless you're a mission-critical type of shop, x86 hardware kicks ass. And I haven't been impressed with the speed of any PPC or SPARC CPUs since the 1.2GHz Athlons came out. Yeah, if you need 16+ way scalability, you'll end up skulking back to the old UNIX/RISC machines, but most of us can do better with NT farms or Linux clusters much like the ones described in this article. (See? I'm ontopic!) Just as RISC UNIX boxes replaced mainframes, the age of the PC server is upon us. Sorry, Big Blue -- your sweet hardware just isn't worth the money. You're going to wish that you didn't embrace GNU/Linux when you can't sell software or hardware to us anymore.

    -- The_Messenger

  103. Re: when I don't understand AIX I say 'When you d by macdaddy · · Score: 2

    Actually it's in use where I work and personally I can't stand the damned thing.

  104. But does it run Office? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    -Just because I couldn't I never thought about if I shouldn't.............

  105. Wasted by shokk · · Score: 1

    I wonder how much of that power goes wasted into the regular administration of the site, idle time, everyone's web and email traffic, and storing employees' pr0n pix and mp3s, instead of the science it is intended for. It is my experience in a corporate environment that no one ever cleans up disk or mail boxes and they don't consider the impact of running non-essential processes on compute servers.

    Also, what are they doing to protect and backup that much data?

    --
    "Beware of he who would deny you access to information, for in his heart, he dreams himself your master."
  106. I'm just glad it's not the NSA... by Bonker · · Score: 2

    Because that's some powerful encryption breaking power... if you know what I mean...

    --
    The next Slashdot story will be ready soon, but subscribers can beat the rush and slashdot the links early!
    1. Re:I'm just glad it's not the NSA... by IAmBlakeM · · Score: 1

      They'll show up somewhere. They usually find a way.

  107. Re:From the wired article by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Open Source is good. +5.

  108. Deep Thought ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    But can it answer the ultimate question - to life, the universe and everything?

    And can they keep it running for 7.5 million years without needing a service pack? (I'm pretty certain the mice would be furious)

    Oh well, So long, and thanks for all the fish.

  109. cracking power? by QX-Mat · · Score: 1

    Someone must be able to do their maths out there and figure out how fast you can crack 128bit encryption at 12 terraflops? (and you know the US govmt. has a centre like this alread right?) Matt

  110. From the wired article by pgpckt · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The hope is that -- as an open source network using Linux and standard IBM servers -- it will be easily expandable and able to follow a similar trajectory to the Internet.

    "The only way to do this project is open source," project director Stevens said.


    Interesting that researches know that open source projects are the only way they can control all the variables. After all, if you don't control the OS, you can't be sure some little bug in the code is screwing with your data. Universities have long understood this principle, which is why Unix is so popular. Now our millions of tax payer dollars will be spent on research rather then licensing costs, plus the research is controlled, scalable, and open to peer review. Always nice to see professionals understand the benefits of open source that no closed source movement could possibly replicate.

    --
    Lawrence Lessig is my personal hero.