Slashdot Mirror


There's A Cluster of 750 Raspberry Pi's at Los Alamos National Lab (insidehpc.com)

Slashdot reader overheardinpdx shares a video from the SC17 supercomputing conference where Bruce Tulloch from BitScope "describes a low-cost Rasberry Pi cluster that Los Alamos National Lab is using to simulate large-scale supercomputers." Slashdot reader mspohr describes them as "five rack-mount Bitscope Cluster Modules, each with 150 Raspberry Pi boards with integrated network switches." With each of the 750 chips packing four cores, it offers a 3,000-core highly parallelizable platform that emulates an ARM-based supercomputer, allowing researchers to test development code without requiring a power-hungry machine at significant cost to the taxpayer. The full 750-node cluster, running 2-3 W per processor, runs at 1000W idle, 3000W at typical and 4000W at peak (with the switches) and is substantially cheaper, if also computationally a lot slower. After development using the Pi clusters, frameworks can then be ported to the larger scale supercomputers available at Los Alamos National Lab, such as Trinity and Crossroads.
BitScope's Tulloch points out the cluster is fully integrated with the network switching infrastructure at Los Alamos National Lab, and applauds the Raspberry Bi cluster as "affordable, scalable, highly parallel testbed for high-performance-computing system-software developers."

54 of 128 comments (clear)

  1. It's an older meme, sir, but it checks out... by Entrope · · Score: 5, Funny

    Did they make a Beowulf cluster of those?

    1. Re:It's an older meme, sir, but it checks out... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I christen thee a Finnesburg cluster.

    2. Re:It's an older meme, sir, but it checks out... by jrmcferren · · Score: 1

      Now we just need a cluster of the clusters in the name of Science.

      --
      sudo mod me up
  2. Re: Obvious unimportant topic by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Fuck Beta!

  3. No wonder pi's are hard to buy by sjwest · · Score: 1

    When somebody buys 750 all at once.

    It was my experience that pi's are hard to buy so i gave up trying to get one. Mind you when people use ancient rasbian os and make 'secure' email servers on port 26 and then get called out for issues it is good to see that somebody is using them properly instead of poorly.

    1. Re:No wonder pi's are hard to buy by hcs_$reboot · · Score: 1

      The PI is sold everywhere, at the site + amazon etc... got mine quickly. Sure if you try to get the latest thing the next day, that could be challenging.

      --
      Slashdot, fix the reply notifications... You won't get away with it...
    2. Re:No wonder pi's are hard to buy by serviscope_minor · · Score: 1

      It was my experience that pi's are hard to buy so i gave up trying to get one.

      Maybe once upon a time...?

      You can get them from many of the major vendors these days. I usually get mine from RS but I suspect the likes of Farnell and so on sell them too. I expect Amazon sells them too!

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
    3. Re:No wonder pi's are hard to buy by Zaiff+Urgulbunger · · Score: 1

      Mind you when people use ancient rasbian os and make 'secure' email servers on port 26 and then get called out for issues it is good to see that somebody is using them properly instead of poorly.

      You know Raspbian is basically Debian? So it's pretty solid for the most part.

    4. Re:No wonder pi's are hard to buy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      Element 14 has 80,000 in stock and ready to ship.

      750 would be a small order.

    5. Re:No wonder pi's are hard to buy by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 1

      The PI is sold everywhere, at the site + amazon etc...

      The RPi Zero has been sold out continuously everywhere for months.

    6. Re: No wonder pi's are hard to buy by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 1

      Theyâ(TM)ve been regularly in stock at my local Micro Center for months.

      Micro Center's website listed them as "out of stock" for at least the last 4 months. They are currently not listed at all. So apparently they no longer carry them, or at least are no longer taking new orders.

      I buy one almost every trip.

      A Zero? Without buying a $30 "development kit" that includes a $5 Pi? I don't think so.

    7. Re:No wonder pi's are hard to buy by piojo · · Score: 1

      Not a programmer, are you?

      --
      A cat can't teach a dog to bark.
  4. Raspberry Bi? by HalAtWork · · Score: 1

    As in bidirectional communication I assume!

  5. Re: Cost by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    You are missing the point! The idea is not to have an super computer but to emulate one. Writing code for stuff like thus is hard and running it on the real deal is expensive. This way the can emulate 750 core system at an fraction of the cost.

  6. Re:Cost by JaredOfEuropa · · Score: 1

    Apparently the point is to simulate a powerful machine with many cores, so that people can develop and optimize their code without requiring CPU time on the actual (very expensive) machine.

    --
    If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
  7. Excellent way to learn parallel programming. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    If you cannot get 1000's of slow cpu's to scale, then wasting debug time on the big fast server is really a waste. Today's programmers need to learn how it used to be. Even with using RPI's they have an advantage. The network is much faster than what we had 20 or 30 years years ago. Internal busses are faster, ram/memory is faster, caches are faster. This is a smart way to spend money for a bringup development environment on the cheap.

  8. Re: Cost by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    You get effect of network latency to induce concurrency paradoxes that wouldn't happen on a shared memory system.

    ObCarAnalogy: a single bus can move a lot of people, but if you're modeling highway traffic, you want to use many independent cars.

  9. Re:Obvious unimportant topic by Zero__Kelvin · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Not really, but it does show that there are a lot more idiots like you coming here, and a lot fewer of the people who belong here. My very first thought was "Holy shit! Something that actually belongs on Slashdot on Slashdot!" If your thought was "meh" then I have no idea why you even come here.

    --
    Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
  10. Re: Cost by mean+pun · · Score: 5, Insightful

    You are missing the point! This way the can emulate 750 core system at an fraction of the cost.

    So, what point am I missing? The Xeon phi 7290 is 4k$ and has 72 cores, you can get 10 of those and get way more speed, shared memory benefit etc...

    Entirely different architecture. The point of this scale model is to have a cluster of compute nodes with TCP/IP communication between them.

  11. Re: Cost by serviscope_minor · · Score: 5, Insightful

    So, what point am I missing? The Xeon phi 7290 is 4k$ and has 72 cores, you can get 10 of those and get way more speed, shared memory benefit etc...

    The shared memory is a detrator not a benefit if you're trying to have something which emulates an expensive distributed architeture. The point isn't to get lots of speed, it's to get a bunch of cores distributed over a local network in order to get a cheap test bed emulation of a much larger machine.

    --
    SJW n. One who posts facts.
  12. Attack of the Errant Apostrophe by tsqr · · Score: 1

    You don't need a supercomputer to figure out that the headline is poor usage. The Chicago Manual of Style will do that for you.

  13. You mean 75% fewer cores, fewer connects, no RAM by raymorris · · Score: 5, Informative

    10 CPUs with 72 cores each is 720 cores.
    750 SOCs with 4 cores each is 3,000 cores (and RAM and motherboards included).

    The point is to have a massive number of cores in a large number of machines, to simulate a large number of machines, at the budget point. Your idea would have 75% fewer cores.

    > shared memory

    Yep, that's another problem with your idea. It would no longer be an accurate simulation. Well except your plan doesn't include any RAM at all. Or motherboards, networking, etc. You're going to need to buy 750 network cards to simulate 750 machines, motherboards each capable of holding 18 cards, a number of storage devices, etc. So maybe FIVE 7290 CPUs with exotic motherboards plus RAM, network cards, storage, etc. Five 7290s would provide 360 cores, vs the 3,000 cores they got with the Pis.

    Now AFTER the research yields fruit, in a couple years someone might want to put the ideas into production using fifty 72-core processors which may cost $2,000 each.

  14. Re:Fuck Net Neutrality by DontBeAMoran · · Score: 1

    This happens so often that I think we need a new mod:
    Score: -1 Wrong topic, you idiot

    --
    #DeleteFacebook
  15. Re: horse-shit by DontBeAMoran · · Score: 2

    Next year the CPUs will be twice as fast or twice as many.

    That was 20 years ago. Today we don't get those kinds of performance leaps anymore.

    --
    #DeleteFacebook
  16. Re: Cost by gerf · · Score: 1

    Here you can unplug a node to simulate a hardware failure. The latency is more real world between nodes. Cache levels are more similar (L1 L2 RAM) , hardware levels (nic, bridge, CPU). It's a cheap approximation. Leave it at that.

  17. Re:Learn how to use a fucking apostrophe by DontBeAMoran · · Score: 1

    Thereâ(TM)s A Cluster of 750 Raspberry Piâ(TM)s at Los Alamos National Lab

    There. Happy now?

    --
    #DeleteFacebook
  18. Re: Cost by kyrsjo · · Score: 2

    Not useless if you're debugging queue systems, schedulers etc.

  19. Re:Cost by kyrsjo · · Score: 2

    ROFL. We're not talking about debugging the scientific number crunching code that will run on the actual cluster, but the cluster management software. The actual jobs to run may very well just be doing sleep(10000*rand()); if rand()0.1 call WriteAllTheDiskSpace; else if rand() 0.2 then call segfault_horribly(); else return SUCCESS;. etc.;, one should probably add in a few more "bad things", MPI calls etc.

  20. Re:Learn how to use a fucking apostrophe by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    No, there isn't a square-boxed question mark.

  21. Re: Cost by mean+pun · · Score: 1

    Your analogies have zero relevance to how HPCs work.

    They are relevant. What is zero is your willingness to learn, or at least accept that other people know what they are doing.

  22. Re:You mean 75% fewer cores, fewer connects, no RA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    1440 is NOT 3000!!! AND
    your power budget went to
    hell in a hand basket.

    One other thing, your being
    a DICKWAD.

  23. Re: Cost by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    The only difference between a cluster and and a shared memory machine is you pay by the minute on the cluster. If you haven't realized that consumption fee is the same whether you are debugging or doing actual science, then you are the moron who can't see the point of using a less powerful less costly cluster to do mockups.

  24. Re: Cost by rthille · · Score: 1

    The RPi modules are 4-core, so the cluster is 3000 cores.

    --
    Awesome furniture, accessories and cabinetry in Santa Rosa, CA: http://humanity-home.com/
  25. Re: Cost by guruevi · · Score: 1

    Interconnects don't matter much. Whether you use InfiniBand, GigE or serial, you're just pumping TCP packets.

    --
    Custom electronics and digital signage for your business: www.evcircuits.com
  26. Re: Cost by MrMr · · Score: 2

    I don't think it is acceptable to make an understandable and relevant car analogy.

  27. Re: Cost by OrangeTide · · Score: 1

    I wonder how many Commodore 64's I could emulate at once on a decent sized workstation. Maybe 500?

    --
    “Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
  28. Re: Cost by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 1

    You could do all that by setting up a bunch of VMs on a shared memory machine.

    That will give you different latencies and different bottlenecks. The point of this system is not to crunch data, but to serve as a testbed for parallel software development. It is possible that they also use VMs, but that would be in addition to this cluster rather than a replacement.

  29. I hope it's not idling. by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

    1kW at idle is a lot. You could cut that down by shutting down Pis in banks as they went unused, and firing them up again as needed. It wouldn't require very much more hardware, just some microrelay boards which can be driven by some of the Pis themselves.

    --
    "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    1. Re:I hope it's not idling. by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      1 kW is not a lot of power, it's the equivalent of someone always using the hand dryer in the bathroom.

      It's not a lot of power on their scale, it's true. But it's a lot of power to waste idling on a low-power project, when it's easily avoidable.

      It's probably not idling much anyway.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    2. Re:I hope it's not idling. by dj245 · · Score: 1

      1kW at idle is a lot. You could cut that down by shutting down Pis in banks as they went unused, and firing them up again as needed. It wouldn't require very much more hardware, just some microrelay boards which can be driven by some of the Pis themselves.

      Electricity in New Mexico is $0.11 to $0.12 per kwh. So at maximum they would save $0.12 per hour. You would spend far more in labor/coding/hardware than you would ever save in power costs. Plus you may introduce bugs or other issues that would take even more time to fix or delay useful work.

      Do you work in academia?

      --
      Even those who arrange and design shrubberies are under considerable economic stress at this period in history.
  30. Big deal by fahrbot-bot · · Score: 1

    There's A Cluster of 750 Raspberry Pi's at Los Alamos National Lab

    I saw a bunch of them at the grocery store before Thanksgiving, next to the apple ones.

    --
    It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
  31. Re: You mean 75% fewer cores, fewer connects, no R by F.Ultra · · Score: 1

    Emulating the cores would falsify what they are testing since this would reduce a lot of possible race conditions (among other things). Virtualization is nice but it's not an end all solution.

  32. Speed by tigersha · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Purely out of academic interest, how fast is this thing? How does it compete with, say, a 16 core Xeon or Threadripper workstation?

    --
    The dangers of excessive individualism are nothing compared to the oppressiveness of excessive collectivism
    1. Re:Speed by qubezz · · Score: 1

      A Rasberry Pi 3 can do 6GFLOPs, if you can keep it cool enough to not immediately start throttling. 6x750= 4.5TFLOPs. A single NVidia GTX 1080Ti does 4TFLOPs double-precision and 11.5TFLOPs single-precision.

      The academic interest is that this actually has 750 separate and independent CPUs and nodes, so one can see how tasks scale and bottleneck. You can't accurately virtualize all these parameters.

  33. Re: You mean 75% fewer cores, fewer connects, no R by viperidaenz · · Score: 1

    And running 1.2GHz 4 core STB processors over 10/100 ethernet is going to be similar to clusters of dual socket 3GHz 54 core processors with 25+ Gbps interconnects? (aka Cavium ThunderX2 CPUs. Nobody is planning on building an ARM based supercomputer with only one CPU per node, let alone with IO limited smartphone/tablet/set-top-box oriented SoCs)

  34. Re:Obvious unimportant topic by 14erCleaner · · Score: 1, Funny

    This will obviously be used to verify global warming, so it belongs here. Let's argue politics!

    --
    Have you read my blog lately?
  35. Re: Obvious unimportant topic by Buck+Feta · · Score: 2

    You raang?

    --
    I am Audience.
  36. Re:Cost by coofercat · · Score: 1

    Oh yes, true. Now why on earth didn't the folks Los Alamos think of that!? They must be complete idiots. You should write to them and explain your ideas - they might give you a job as their chief architect, or maybe their Head of Cost Cutting.

  37. The Megaprocessor Still Laughs by tmjva · · Score: 1

    I think this was also on slashdot last year:

    https://robertmcgrath.wordpress.com/tag/the-megaprocessor-laughs-at-your-puny-integrated-circuits-stephen-cass/

    --
    Tracy Johnson
    Old fashioned text games hosted below:
    http://empire.openmpe.com/
    BT
  38. Re:HEY MODERATOR! GO SODOMIZE YOURSELF WITH SAWBLA by KingBenny · · Score: 1

    moderation is for assholes , but ... here you don't get moderated, you get rated ... one might say you seem to be over reacting a bit but thats fine, i divide my days between standard and less bad too, if this is your biggest problem today then it can't be that bad its not like you get money or anything for it, right ? i like the "green computing" approach here btw

    --
    Free speech was meant to be free for all... how can anyone grow up in a nanny state ?
  39. Re: You mean 75% fewer cores, fewer connects, no R by F.Ultra · · Score: 1

    They are testing how their software scales to a massive amount of cores. This you cannot do on a single Xeon Phi. The speed and available bandwidth is irrelevant for that, it is of course relevant for other test cases but that is not what they test here.

  40. Re: You mean 75% fewer cores, fewer connects, no R by F.Ultra · · Score: 1

    No because if a single core emulated 10 other cores there will i.e never be a situation where those 10 cores execute an instruction all at the same time. The laws of physics you know.

  41. Re: You mean 75% fewer cores, fewer connects, no R by viperidaenz · · Score: 1

    Someone should invent software for emulating a CPU, that way you could use one machine to emulate many.

    I'd call it a virtual machine.

  42. Re: You mean 75% fewer cores, fewer connects, no R by F.Ultra · · Score: 1

    And you cannot (as of yet) effectively simulate the kind of massive scale out that places like this code for.