Re:Let me see if I understand this
on
ClusterKnoppix
·
· Score: 5, Informative
> If you set this up correctly all the computers that you boot
> up with this become a mosix cluster?
an openMosix cluster, not a mosix cluster.
>Then all the users are terminals off of this cluster?
if you want, yes.
> So all of the users have some of all of the power of the > Mosix cluster?
yes
> I just wonder how well mosix handles nodes dropping > off and back on again.
if a node goes down for a small time, and then comes back, no problem. if a node goes down for a time long enough to finish his work, processes won't come back where they came from, so you (or your apps or scripts) have to take care of this situation. tipically in a cluster you don't want nodes to go down, never. this can be a situation tipical in a pc laboratory or the like, for an entire campus this probably is not adequate, you need something more "grid computing aware"
>Plus how well will can is scale?
it depends a lot on the speed of the connection between nodes, on the type and amount of traffic generated and so on the type of computation being made, on the number of nodes, on the speed of the clients, etc...
>Could you have five hundred or a thousand systems off in the cluster.
tecnically up to 65535 nodes (last 2 bytes of ipv4 address) if i'm not wrong. i was told biggest cluster of this types count 1-2k nodes, but i'm not sure.
> Everything kept in RAM.
not necessarily, everything kept on the server...
Re:How'd you boot the clients?
on
ClusterKnoppix
·
· Score: 4, Informative
you can do it in both ways.
i had 2 nics that support pxe boot, i just had to follow the wizard on the server, and turn the clients on. job done. ah, i precautionally turned off my already running dhcp server after booting the first clusterknoppix machine, don't know if it was necessary, i was afraid of conflicting dhcp servers because clusterknoppix starts it's own with the wizard.
Re:Can ClusterKnoppix clients boot from the CD?
on
ClusterKnoppix
·
· Score: 1
they mount the root filesystem entirely over the lan from another machine. i have 2 machines at home that works without hdd, cdrom and floppy disk. your network card must support pxe boot, and the server must be configured rigth with dhcp or other ways. if your network card can't boot from the lan you will need at least a floppy (or a cdrom) to make the system boot.
Re:hmmm. game servers?
on
ClusterKnoppix
·
· Score: 2, Informative
one example:
http://openmosix.sourceforge.net/#Documentation
the last one.
afaik it is installable, but you need a bit more space, about 2gb.
speaking of beowulf cluster of beowulf cluster, in clusterknoppix there is bochs (and it can migrate through nodes), so maybe you could run clusterknoppix recursively into itself...
1) this is not mosix (but the target is the same)
2) this is an HP setup.
clients are run in textmode only, only eventually with a full blown kde to use it as also as a terminal server. you choose.
Re:As if I needed another reason...
on
ClusterKnoppix
·
· Score: 5, Interesting
i didn't touch the keyboard. ten clicks with the mouse (i'm sure they where not more than ten...) and i was running a single system image cluster based on 3 diskless nodes... it is probably easyer to set it up than to explain what it can do. and it can do A LOT...
so, if in the (extremely..) long run (because of the superiority of opensource) everybody will be writing opensource software, we will make a favour to microsoft not letting them to take some free code an putting it in their closed product, because they will understand it earlier.
gpl was born long before someone tried to convince the business world that opensource software is better than closed source (i believe in this btw), and is independent of this being true or false.
if opensource is better than closed source, with either gpl or bsd in the long run we will see only (or mostly) opensource software, so i don't see a very big difference in using gpl or bsd licence (but i would still prefer gpl in most situation, because for example i wouldn't want to see my code used by someone that erroneusly thinks that closed source is better or by someone thant in the short run can make money from it), and i see most complaints against bsd or gpl (like your) completely useless.
but if opensource is not better, with bsd license in the long run we will see only closed source software. instead with gpl we will still see opensource software. maybe you wouldn't be interested in opensource if it turns out to be inferior, but i sure would be interested even in this case. because for me it is NOT a mere technical question.
> What if FreeBSD was the big, popular, multi-distro OS that
> Linux is today. Would most of us *care* whether the
> kernel was BSD-licensed instead of GPL licensed? I sure
> as hell wouldn't.
in fact no. bsd license is not a problem with debian. maybe you should read the dfsg, that originally inspired the OSI (http://www.opensource.org).
there are even (early) debian version based on the netbsd and freebsd kernel. so, you are terribly wrong.
Slashdot Mirror
> If you set this up correctly all the computers that you boot
> up with this become a mosix cluster?
an openMosix cluster, not a mosix cluster.
>Then all the users are terminals off of this cluster?
if you want, yes.
> So all of the users have some of all of the power of the
> Mosix cluster?
yes
> I just wonder how well mosix handles nodes dropping
> off and back on again.
if a node goes down for a small time, and then comes back, no problem. if a node goes down for a time long enough to finish his work, processes won't come back where they came from, so you (or your apps or scripts) have to take care of this situation. tipically in a cluster you don't want nodes to go down, never. this can be a situation tipical in a pc laboratory or the like, for an entire campus this probably is not adequate, you need something more "grid computing aware"
>Plus how well will can is scale?
it depends a lot on the speed of the connection between nodes, on the type and amount of traffic generated and so on the type of computation being made, on the number of nodes, on the speed of the clients, etc...
>Could you have five hundred or a thousand systems off in the cluster.
tecnically up to 65535 nodes (last 2 bytes of ipv4 address) if i'm not wrong. i was told biggest cluster of this types count 1-2k nodes, but i'm not sure.
> Everything kept in RAM.
not necessarily, everything kept on the server...
you can do it in both ways. i had 2 nics that support pxe boot, i just had to follow the wizard on the server, and turn the clients on. job done. ah, i precautionally turned off my already running dhcp server after booting the first clusterknoppix machine, don't know if it was necessary, i was afraid of conflicting dhcp servers because clusterknoppix starts it's own with the wizard.
yes. and probably from a floppy too.
they mount the root filesystem entirely over the lan from another machine. i have 2 machines at home that works without hdd, cdrom and floppy disk. your network card must support pxe boot, and the server must be configured rigth with dhcp or other ways. if your network card can't boot from the lan you will need at least a floppy (or a cdrom) to make the system boot.
one example: http://openmosix.sourceforge.net/#Documentation the last one.
afaik it is installable, but you need a bit more space, about 2gb. speaking of beowulf cluster of beowulf cluster, in clusterknoppix there is bochs (and it can migrate through nodes), so maybe you could run clusterknoppix recursively into itself...
1) this is not mosix (but the target is the same) 2) this is an HP setup. clients are run in textmode only, only eventually with a full blown kde to use it as also as a terminal server. you choose.
yes
i didn't touch the keyboard. ten clicks with the mouse (i'm sure they where not more than ten...) and i was running a single system image cluster based on 3 diskless nodes... it is probably easyer to set it up than to explain what it can do. and it can do A LOT...
and what's so hard about modconf?
the one sold with the old mandrake gaming edition? try again...
so, if in the (extremely..) long run (because of the superiority of opensource) everybody will be writing opensource software, we will make a favour to microsoft not letting them to take some free code an putting it in their closed product, because they will understand it earlier. gpl was born long before someone tried to convince the business world that opensource software is better than closed source (i believe in this btw), and is independent of this being true or false. if opensource is better than closed source, with either gpl or bsd in the long run we will see only (or mostly) opensource software, so i don't see a very big difference in using gpl or bsd licence (but i would still prefer gpl in most situation, because for example i wouldn't want to see my code used by someone that erroneusly thinks that closed source is better or by someone thant in the short run can make money from it), and i see most complaints against bsd or gpl (like your) completely useless. but if opensource is not better, with bsd license in the long run we will see only closed source software. instead with gpl we will still see opensource software. maybe you wouldn't be interested in opensource if it turns out to be inferior, but i sure would be interested even in this case. because for me it is NOT a mere technical question.
> What if FreeBSD was the big, popular, multi-distro OS that > Linux is today. Would most of us *care* whether the > kernel was BSD-licensed instead of GPL licensed? I sure > as hell wouldn't. in fact no. bsd license is not a problem with debian. maybe you should read the dfsg, that originally inspired the OSI (http://www.opensource.org). there are even (early) debian version based on the netbsd and freebsd kernel. so, you are terribly wrong.