On Wed, Sep 9, 2009 at 2:32 PM, Greg Kurtzer <gmkurt...@gmail.com> wrote:
> NFS itself doesn't have any hard limits and I have seen clusters well > over a thousand nodes using it. Thanks Greg! That is very reassuring to know! :) I myself had a installation with 256 NFS mounts but these were ancient clusters which were essentially "groups of single cpu PCs" The "well over a 1000 node NFS clusters" that Greg refers to: Any masters of such installations around on this list? If so I'd give an arm and leg and more to be in touch and grab your tips and comments. Whenever I mention "300 nodes", "Gigabit Ethernet" and NFS in the same breath people look at me as if I was a madman. :) > As an aside note, generally the more specialized or non-standard the > implementation, the more pressure you will put on administration > costs. Exactly. Hence I want NFS to keep things simple ergo cheap. > Keep in mind that the requirements of the system and budget need to > define the architecture of the system. NFS is a good choice and can be > suitable for systems much larger then 300 nodes. *BUT* that would > depend on what you are doing with the cluster, application IO > requirements, usage patterns, user needs, reliability/uptime goals, > etc... I see too many invocations of the "it depends" rule of HPC everywhere I go! :) -- Rahul _______________________________________________ Beowulf mailing list, Beowulf@beowulf.org sponsored by Penguin Computing To change your subscription (digest mode or unsubscribe) visit http://www.beowulf.org/mailman/listinfo/beowulf
