Linux Clustering

An anonymous reader writes "Beowulf clustering turns 10 years old, and, in this interview, creator Donald Becker talks about how Beowulf can handle high-end computing on a par with supercomputers."

Comments

On par? Yes and no

[grape jelly]

Beowulf clusters have never been the fix-all solution to pricey supercomputer needs. Traditional mainframe supercomputers will forever have their niche in computing that can't just be muscled through sheer volume of vector processes (i.e., processes in which good latency is essential). Even the creator of the Beowulf cluster agrees:

Quote from the article: *snip!*

Supercomputer vendor Cray has created a new product that is designed to compete with some Linux clusters. Cray Canada CTO Paul Terry said that Linux clusters really can't compare to a supercomputer. What is your take on Cray's moves against Linux?

Becker: They are simultaneously saying that Linux clusters are not high-performance computing systems while introducing a product to compete with Linux clusters. They clearly saw that a large part of their customer base was moving toward commodity clusters, Beowulf-class clusters, to do high-end computing.

Clusters can't replace all of the workload being done by supercomputers today, but it can replace the bulk of the traditional vector supercomputers. There is always that 10% of the market that won't run well on clusters, and that is the market that Cray is in. We are happy to solve most of the problems of the world and run most of the applications and play in our part of the marketplace.

It's not just about speed and massively parallel

[Wizzy Wig]

processing...

To be considered a "supercomputer," it also needs enough CONTIGUOUS MEMORY SPACE to hold the massive amounts of data associated with true "supercomputing." So far, no cluster has met that requirement.