--- Stuart Midgley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I've spoken quite extensively to several > organisations here in > Western Australia who each have 1000+cpu systems in > Perth, 2000+cpu > systems in London and 4000+ systems in Houston (oil > and gas seismic > processing). They tell me that they have tried to > sell just the > cycle time to no success. The value is in the > specialised services > they offer (in these cases seismic processing), > which just happen to > use a lot of cpu's. > > These companies even go as far to roll their own > cluster file systems > (using FUSE+nfs) and writing their own > queuing/scheduling environment > etc. The higher level services certainly pay well > :) > Hi Stu and friends, Seismic is a totally different beastie. He probably does not want to do that. You have very serious performance parameters you need to maintain. The sheer size of data I/O is mind numbing for those not working in the field. By the time you start with 5+TB of data, travel time data (needed on even higher performance storage), space for temporary files and results, the 400-1000 nodes that will be running hard over the next 4-6 weeks... And I just thought the procurement costs were hard. Add to that infrastructure to support and AC, security, etc. You have spent a couple of fortunes. __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com _______________________________________________ Beowulf mailing list, Beowulf@beowulf.org To change your subscription (digest mode or unsubscribe) visit http://www.beowulf.org/mailman/listinfo/beowulf
