Slashdot Mirror


Fastest-Ever Windows HPC Cluster

An anonymous reader links to an eWeek story which says that Microsoft's "fastest-yet homegrown supercomputer, running the U.S. company's new Windows HPC Server 2008, debuted in the top 25 of the world's top 500 fastest supercomputers, as tested and operated by the National Center for Supercomputing Applications. ... Most of the cores were made up of Intel Xeon quad-core chips. Storage for the system was about 6 terabytes," and asks "I wonder how the uptime compares? When machines scale to this size, they tend to quirk out in weird ways."

34 of 216 comments (clear)

  1. finally by gmack · · Score: 5, Funny

    Enough power to run vista.

    1. Re:finally by Zashi · · Score: 4, Interesting

      You've no idea how right you are.

      I got to test Server 2008 before it was released to the public. All our internal applications identified 2008 as "Vista".

      --
      Skiffy is Spiffy, but Ort is tort.
    2. Re:finally by Sabz5150 · · Score: 5, Funny

      Enough power to run vista.

      But not Crysis :(
      --
      "Who modded this informative? Whoever it is must've been smokin' some of that martian pot!"
    3. Re:finally by v1 · · Score: 3, Funny

      mmm that may make a very nice addition to my botnet. Wonder what it has for network bandwidth?

      --
      I work for the Department of Redundancy Department.
    4. Re:finally by tubapro12 · · Score: 3, Funny

      So, what does one do when their cluster BSODs?

    5. Re:finally by TRS80NT · · Score: 5, Funny

      But you still have to turn off Aero.


      --
      Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet.
    6. Re:finally by dreamchaser · · Score: 4, Funny

      But you still have to turn off Aero.

      Only because they cut some corners and went with integrated graphics on the motherboard.

    7. Re:finally by nmb3000 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I got to test Server 2008 before it was released to the public. All our internal applications identified 2008 as "Vista".

      I have no idea why this is modded Informative.

      Vista uses the NT kernel, version 6.0, build 6000. SP1 puts it up to 6001.
      Server 2008 uses the NT kernel, version 6.0, build 6001.

      Is it any surprise that software build prior to Server 2008 being released see it as Vista?

      In related news, both Ubuntu 8.04 and Fedora 9 report being Linux v2.6.

      --
      "What do you despise? By this are you truly known." --Princess Irulan, Manual of Muad'Dib
      /)
    8. Re:finally by camperslo · · Score: 3, Funny

      If one of these is expected to be networked in normal operation, perhaps it would be reasonable to require that antivirus software be running while doing benchmarks?

    9. Re:finally by neomunk · · Score: 4, Funny

      "Windows has reported an error:
          Cluster:fucked
      Press any key on any terminal to reboot"

    10. Re:finally by nmb3000 · · Score: 4, Informative

      I think the surprise here is that MS is using same core that's in their very shaky Vista software to run their server software.

      I realize it's great fun to aimlessly bash Vista around here but I wasn't aware that the NT kernel was generally considered "shaky". In fact, I didn't even think that Vista was widely considered shaky. Bloated? Maybe. Resource intensive? Possibly. Some stupid UI decisions? Most certainly.

      I'm (begrudgingly) running Vista at home (since I have to support it at work) and I haven't had any stability problems. I do curse the UI team for removing features I deem necessary and adding meaningless clutter, but I haven't seen any crashes or stability issues.

      --
      "What do you despise? By this are you truly known." --Princess Irulan, Manual of Muad'Dib
      /)
  2. Linux? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    But does it run linux?

    1. Re:Linux? by Just+some+bastard · · Score: 3, Informative

      But does it run linux?
      It can but isn't, however this one does :)
  3. Every Tuesday... by kwabbles · · Score: 5, Funny

    "Your cluster has just finished downloading an update, would you like to reboot now?"

    --
    Just disrupt the deflector shield with a tachyon burst.
  4. Clustered Windows Boxes! by Gazzonyx · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The Windows Server 2K8 code base must be better than previous versions of Windows. From what I understood, Windows didn't scale for clustering due to problems with file locking (IIRC, the overhead for tracking locks grew quickly enough that the performance was marginalized past about 4 nodes). Unless they're using an iSCSI SNS server that handles the locks over a clustered file system. Still, this is leaps and bounds beyond previous versions of Windows WRT clustering!

    --

    If I mod you up, it doesn't necessarily mean I agree with what you've said, sorry.

  5. That's ok... by JCSoRocks · · Score: 5, Funny

    So does everyone else.

    --
    You are using English. Please learn the difference between loose and lose; they're, there, and their; your and you're.
  6. Welcome Windows! by Tibor+the+Hun · · Score: 5, Funny

    And with the easily affordable CALs, up to 11 users will be able to use it at the same time! (well 8, 2 CALs will prolly be used by junior admins, and one for "test")

    --
    If you don't know what AltaVista is (was), get off my lawn.
    1. Re:Welcome Windows! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative
  7. Quirk Out? by ProfessionalCookie · · Score: 3, Funny

    When machines scale to this size, they tend to quirk out in weird ways
    Just leave the doctype out and it'll revert to quirks mode. Should work as "intended" even if it does follow the standard.
  8. BSOD by suck_burners_rice · · Score: 3, Funny

    Such a powerful cluster should get from power-up to BSOD instantly!

    --
    McCain/Palin '08. Now THAT's hope and change!
  9. Answers by kiwimate · · Score: 3, Informative

    I don't, but there's a lot of information at the home page. Including links to case studies for NASCAR, Daresbury, etc., etc.

    Including FAQs. And, finally, the answer to the burning question: will it run Linux?

    The application vendor is the best source for determining if your UNIX- or Linux-based application will run on Windows Compute Cluster Server 2003. Note that Microsoft Compute Cluster Pack in CCS can take advantage of 32- and 64-bit versions of Subsystem for UNIX-based Applications (SUA) on Windows Server 2003 Release 2 (R2), which may be required to run UNIX or Linux applications.
  10. New clippy quotes by 192939495969798999 · · Score: 4, Funny

    "It looks like you're breaking into the top 25 fastest supercomputers. Would you like me to fix that?"

    --
    stuff |
  11. I run several Windows Clusters by mpapet · · Score: 4, Insightful

    and I have a very hard time believing most of the claims of fact in this story.

    "When we deployed Windows on our cluster, which has more than 1,000 nodes, we went from bare metal to running the Linpack benchmark programs in just four hours,"

    Hmmm. And what installer was this? Is it available commercially? How much is the license for the version with this mythical four-hour installer?

    "The performance of Windows HPC Server 2008 has yielded efficiencies that are among the highest we've seen for this class of machine," Pennington said.

    What "class" would that be? I imagine it would explicitly exclude Free clusters.

    One should question whether the efficacy of any institution/research project using their grant money wisely given the amount of money required to fulfill Microsoft's licensing requirements.

    Furthermore, If research projects are actually considering wasting their grant dollars on Microsoft licenses, then the outlook for American R&D is grim.

    --
    http://www.maxineudall.com/2010/02/should-economists-be-sued-for-malpractice.html
    1. Re:I run several Windows Clusters by Ai+Olor-Wile · · Score: 3, Funny

      Why, getting activation keys for all of those nodes, of course.

    2. Re:I run several Windows Clusters by Monoman · · Score: 4, Informative

      I'm no MS fanboy but I think someone should make a few points.

      "I run several Windows Clusters"
      and I have a very hard time believing most of the claims of fact in this story.

      I think you might be confusing Windows clustering with MS Compute Cluster (appears to be called HPC now). Windows clustering is used to provide fault tolerant applications where if one fails another node will fire up an instance to replace it. Compute Cluster is for spreading out computations across many active nodes. The HPC nodes do some calculations and return the results back. I guess like SETI.

      Hmmm. And what installer was this? Is it available commercially? How much is the license for the version with this mythical four-hour installer?

      I think the article said this was all done with HPC 2008 beta. You can find out pricing info here: http://www.microsoft.com/hpc/

      "The performance of Windows HPC Server 2008 has yielded efficiencies that are among the highest we've seen for this class of machine," Pennington said.

      What "class" would that be? I imagine it would explicitly exclude Free clusters.

      PC class, not big iron or whatever you want to call those expensive IBM thingys.

      One should question whether the efficacy of any institution/research project using their grant money wisely given the amount of money required to fulfill Microsoft's licensing requirements.

      Furthermore, If research projects are actually considering wasting their grant dollars on Microsoft licenses, then the outlook for American R&D is grim.

      In general I agree. However, I would be surprised if this cost them much at all besides time. They are probably a large enough customer that they get many MS products and services for free. In addition, the publicity for MS makes it worth it to MS to offer tons of incentives. I work at an EDU org and MS pricing is a lot less than retail ... a lot less.

      --
      Keep the Classic Slashdot.
  12. Obligatory... by Undead+NDR · · Score: 4, Funny

    So.... six terabytes... isn't that horribly small by today's standards ?

    Should be enough for everyone.

  13. "Windows HPC Cluster" by ettlz · · Score: 4, Funny

    Is this euphemism for "botnet"?

  14. Not "clustering" by kiwimate · · Score: 3, Informative

    A Windows MSCS cluster is essentially for fail-over/HA purposes. This is for high-performance purposes, and explictly excludes use as an application or database server. From the FAQs (although this is for 2003):

    Windows Compute Cluster Server is licensed for use with HPC applications. HPC applications solve complex computational problems using several servers as a group, also called a cluster, to solve a single computational problem or a single set of closely related computational problems. Applications that run on a single server are not considered HPC applications. Applications that are distributed across multiple servers may not be considered HPC applications, unless they are working on a set of closely related computational problems.

    You may not use Windows Server 2003 Compute Cluster Edition (CCE) as a general purpose server, database server, e-mail server, print server or file server. In order to allow Windows Compute Cluster Server 2003 to be offered at a lower price, its server roles are restricted to computational use only. For example, if users want to install Microsoft SQL(TM) Server 2005 on a cluster node, they will need to purchase and install a full version of Windows Server 2003 64-bit Standard Edition or Windows Server 2003 64-bit Enterprise Edition on that cluster node. To maintain licensing compliance, Windows CCE takes advantage of a feature in Windows Server Standard to protect these applications from being executed. Please see the Windows Compute Cluster Server 2003 Pricing and Licensing page for more information.

  15. Before everyone completely dismisses this story... by Cutie+Pi · · Score: 5, Interesting

    While I don't agree that Microsoft Windows HPC Server is the best software to manage a supercomputer, the linux diehards out there should pay attention to a problem that Microsoft is trying to tackle: accessible supercomputing. See one of their case studies as an example.

    The bottom line is, these days pretty much anyone has access to a few TFlops of compute power, but the learning curve for getting something running on these machines is pretty intimidating, especially for non-CS based disciplines. I've had to take a 1-2 day class, plus futz around with the clunky command-line tools for a few days or so, on every supercomputer I've used, just to get simple jobs running. In my experience, people learn to game the various batching and queuing systems such that their jobs run faster than everyone else's, further shutting out the newcomers.

    HPC vendors would be wise to focus more attention on the tools and interfaces so that Joe-researcher can set the number of nodes and go, rather than having to manually edit loadleveler text files, sending them to the queue, and then coming back next day to find the job failed due to a typo in the startup script.

    On multi-TFLOP systems, not everyone needs 99.5% efficiency with all the implementation details that requires. These days, many people just want their job to run reasonably quickly, with no fuss.

    The same thing happened several years ago with the move to high level languages like Python and Ruby. Sure, they're slower than C++ and FORTRAN. But for the vast majority of applications, you wouldn't know the difference on modern processors. And the turn around time and user-friendliness on these languages is so much better, using them is a no-brainer.

    Hopefully Microsoft can spur the industry in this direction.

  16. Re:Okay... by pontificator · · Score: 3, Informative

    Tha majority are around the 1-4k mark, but in the top 25 the range is from 6720 cores to 212992 cores. Only 2 entries in the top 25 have fewer cores than Microsoft

    http://www.top500.org/list/2008/06/100

    Basically, it's all brute force if you want to get into the top 25.

  17. Re:Before everyone completely dismisses this story by bockelboy · · Score: 3, Interesting

    From your case study:

    """
    In addition, it is investigating ways to allow users to connect remotely to the cluster. It expects to complete the project and move the cluster into production by March 2009.
    """

    By time the cluster in the case study allows users to remotely log in, the hardware will have lost at least 1/2 of its value.

    While more work is needed to make things user friendly, you have to remember that the funding is there for CPUs; not many folks are forward looking enough to realize researchers really need funding into making stuff easier.

  18. more similar by DrYak · · Score: 4, Interesting

    In related news, both Ubuntu 8.04 and Fedora 9 report being Linux v2.6. Except that Linux kernel is just a tiny part of a distribution. In fact, those two distribution don't even share the same version, yet alone build. (Distrowatch pages for Ubuntu and Fedora could tell you the difference in version for most common components)

    Whereas Server 2008 and Vista share a tad more of their code base.

    and *that* is relevant.

    And could be humorously be alluded to because of the mis-detection of some software.

    --
    "Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]
  19. accessible supercomputing .. by rs232 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    "Microsoft is trying to tackle: accessible supercomputing"

    Assuming MS was responding to this imagioned problem ..

    "The contest showed that supercomputers .. are accessible to people interested in pursuing science, simulation or modeling"

    "but the learning curve for getting something running on these machines is pretty intimidating, especially for non-CS based disciplines. I've had to take a 1-2 day class, plus futz around"

    You actually programed a supercomouter - cool. What type and where exactly? How does HPC Server differ in respect to other solutions?

    "the Blue Gene family of supercomputers has been designed to deliver ultrascale performance within a standard programming environment"

    "Hopefully Microsoft can spur the industry in this direction"

    You mean like continually inventing Apple, badly .. :)

    --
    davecb5620@gmail.com
    1. Re:accessible supercomputing .. by Cutie+Pi · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Accessibility can mean: 1) able to access, 2) easy to use. When it comes to supercomputers, th former is very much true nowadays, but the latter is not. And it's not just a matter of programming. Pretty much all supercomputers can be programmed with a standard programming environment, say C + MPI + SCALAPACK libraries. (I think more could be done on that side too, but that is a different story).

      But the steps required to actually run the programs can be exceedingly difficult. I liken it to the state of desktop linux about 12 years ago... Yes, it was accessible in that PCs were everywhere and you could grab a free copy of Slackware, but the setup process was mind numbing. Setting up X was not for the faint hearted as it required knowing intimate details about your graphics and display hardware. There were stern warnings that using the wrong modeline values could damage your CRT. Nowadays even my grandmother could install Ubuntu and everything would be automatically detected. That's the progress that I think needs to happen on the supercomputer user interface side of things.