the thing I don't like about controlled PDUs is that they're pretty
harsh - don't you expect a higher failure rate of node PSUs if you go
yanking the power this way?
Why?
If nodes shutdown, on commands from the scheduler, that is good.
And, if they do not, how is cutting power by the PDU socket any different
than a power switch on the node?
I don't design PSU's, but yanking the cord seems "rude" compared to
simply raising the "please power off" signal. the latter is part of
all PSU's these days, and is what IPMI uses (via I2C, I guess).
perhaps it's superstition - I do always prefer to use the off button,
rather than ranking the cord. but thinking of how a switching PSU works,
perhaps it doesn't really matter - it views the input power as highly
variable anyway (ie, 90-250V, and with that annoying 50-60 Hz flutter ;)
If you set your machines BIOS to start on power up, it is trivial to stop
and start machines with the PD U power, and that is definitely reliable.
huh? we're talking about network-attached IPMI, which is fully independent
of the controlled motherboard's bios. are you talking about those hybrid
systems where the IPMI controller shares an ethernet port with the host?
or IPMI through a kernel driver?
Either.
Most share a port, some have dedicated ports on board.
I'm not sure about the "most" part - HP's don't, and it looks like supermicro
offers options both ways. all the recent tyan boards I've looked at had
dedicated IPMI/OPMA onboard. all HP machines have dedicated ports.
but to me this has all the hallmarks of a religious issue, so...
_______________________________________________
Beowulf mailing list, Beowulf@beowulf.org
To change your subscription (digest mode or unsubscribe) visit
http://www.beowulf.org/mailman/listinfo/beowulf
