On Wed, 2008-01-16 at 09:18 -0500, Douglas Eadline wrote: > I get the desire for fault tolerance etc. and I like the idea > of migration. It is just that many HPC people have spent > careers getting applications/middleware as close to the bare > metal as possible. The whole VM concept seems orthogonal to > this goal. I'm curious how people are approaching this > problem.
There was a paper on this at SC, I don't know if you caught it... http://sc07.supercomputing.org/schedule/event_detail.php?evid=11066 If I was to try and sum it up in one paragraph it would be: "The advantages of virtulisation are obvious but for some reason the HPC community have been slow to reap these benefits, we predict that this is because of a perception that the performance of comms and VM operations suffers when virtulised. This is true however we have demonstrated that with months of work this performance loss could be minimised such that instead of slowing down performance a lot it would only slow down performance a bit." I think progress is being made on the comms front, both in terms of raw numbers (bandwidth/latency) but also in reducing CPU usage but we are still a long way from it being widely used. Ashley, _______________________________________________ Beowulf mailing list, Beowulf@beowulf.org To change your subscription (digest mode or unsubscribe) visit http://www.beowulf.org/mailman/listinfo/beowulf
