While we're discussion interesting variations, is anyone here familiar
with the IBM T5+ hardware, and the potential for 8x16-way nodes with
16GB/node... nominally shared memory but supposedly reconfigurable
(dynamically) for NUMA?
Thoughts, experiences, suspicions are all welcome.
Thanks gerr
My preference, as well, is to maintain the mailing list. Somehow, I
didn't see a problem with the mail described by Don.
FURTHER (sorry for shouting, but I wanted your attention), I want to
commend Don on the effort it takes to keep moderating a list like this,
with an excellent SNR and a str
On Wednesday 08 February 2006 11:54, Donald Becker wrote:
---snip---
> The bottom line is that we are considering a message board format to
> replace the mailing list. It would have required logins to
> post, and retroactive moderation to delete advertising and trolls.
> Any opinions?
This list f
Donald Becker wrote:
> The bottom line is that we are considering a message board format to
> replace the mailing list. It would have required logins to
> post, and retroactive moderation to delete advertising and trolls.
> Any opinions?
I would absolutely and positively hate it. Please don't.
On Mon, Feb 06, 2006 at 04:07:50PM -0800, Donald Becker wrote:
> Nor does "ramdisk root" give you the magic. A ramdisk root is part of how
> we implement the architecture, especially the part about not requiring local
> storage or network file systems to work. (Philosophy: You mount file
> sys
Dear list,
Some colleagues have at last decided to give up the upgrading of their
traditional shared-memory supercomputer, which I have always found a
waste of money with its 32 cores which gives it less power
than our 100+ cluster for 6 times the price. I find that traditional
big iron is onl
> Are you suggesting, gasp, parallel processing on a cluster of biological
> processors?
*chuckle*
> More to the point, what software or process will be used for spreading the
> workload? It has to be delay tolerant, error correcting, self
> authenticating, and probably something else too.
D
> > I have deep admiration for DNS, and quite a lot of scorn for
> > various other systems that try to do similar things, poorly.
> > for instance, LDAP works, but that's the best you can say for it.
> > imagine if the LDAP folk had thought of how to use DNS as a
> > directory infrastructure (but
On Thu, 2006-02-09 at 12:17 -0500, Mark Hahn wrote:
> I have deep admiration for DNS, and quite a lot of scorn for
> various other systems that try to do similar things, poorly.
> for instance, LDAP works, but that's the best you can say for it.
> imagine if the LDAP folk had thought of how to us
At 01:36 PM 2/9/2006, Andrew Piskorski wrote:
On Wed, Feb 08, 2006 at 11:54:31AM -0800, Donald Becker wrote:
> And except for a few weeks scattered over the history of the list,
> I've been the sole or primary moderator.
Uh, sole moderator? Why is that? Surely there are dozens of
long-time po
On Wed, Feb 08, 2006 at 11:54:31AM -0800, Donald Becker wrote:
> And except for a few weeks scattered over the history of the list,
> I've been the sole or primary moderator.
Uh, sole moderator? Why is that? Surely there are dozens of
long-time posters on the list who might be happy to spend a
On Thu, 2006-02-09 at 07:09 +, Andrew M.A. Cater wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 08, 2006 at 10:01:06PM +, Martin Wheeler wrote:
> > On Wed, 8 Feb 2006, Donald Becker wrote:
> >
> > >The bottom line is that we are considering a message board format to
> > >replace the mailing list.
I would vote ver
On Thu, Feb 09, 2006 at 12:17:43PM -0500, Mark Hahn wrote:
> > > > I belive i have seen on this maling list*, and other internet fourms**
> > > > some
> > > > limitation of NIS, but i have failed to find a documented limiation from
> > > > SUN, or from the various linux distrubutions, did any one
> > > I belive i have seen on this maling list*, and other internet fourms**
> > > some
> > > limitation of NIS, but i have failed to find a documented limiation from
> > > SUN, or from the various linux distrubutions, did any one try to research
> > > the scalability of NIS servers?
> >
> > The
I always respond offline from my email client while riding the train.
That is when I have the extra time, and that won't work with a website.
Michael
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Behalf Of Robert G. Brown
Sent: Wednesday, February 08, 2006 7:23
I would just have the end-user take care of the rare event of spam
getting through. They have to protect themselves already because beowulf
is not the only source of email for anybody.
I would vote for leaving it as it is.
Michael
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAI
On Thu, 9 Feb 2006, Douglas Eadline wrote:
I would hate to see this resource change into another form. It truly
is an *incredibly valuable resource* with a high signal to noise ratio and
virtually spam free - thanks Don.
I would also be willing to bet that the collective minds of this
list can
I would hate to see this resource change into another form. It truly
is an *incredibly valuable resource* with a high signal to noise ratio and
virtually spam free - thanks Don.
I would also be willing to bet that the collective minds of this
list can figure out a way to keep it intact. Whether it
On Mon, Feb 06, 2006 at 01:37:46PM -0800, Greg Lindahl wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 05, 2006 at 07:34:26AM +0300, Walid wrote:
>
> > I belive i have seen on this maling list*, and other internet fourms** some
> > limitation of NIS, but i have failed to find a documented limiation from
> > SUN, or from the
19 matches
Mail list logo
