Hi Mark!
Quoting (30.09.09 21:13):
>> I allready saw a lot of Beowulfs where the management network is so rarely
>> used that nobody detects errors. When an emergencie arrives, the operators
>> struggles over the screwed up switches and unplugged cables.
> I think that's insane (no offense inten
On Wed, Sep 30, 2009 at 03:31:15PM +0100, Hearns, John wrote:
> Are you happy with the IPMI on Supermicro? I've been unable to
> personally test a KVM + remote media IPMI from them,
I have 200+ nodes of SuperMicro IPMI, and its suckage is not as much as
the average I've seen over the years. I'v
Yes, but the tiny road is still useable by the emergency services when
there's been a pileup on the main cariageway, and there are wreckage
and bodies everywhere!
I allready saw a lot of Beowulfs where the management network is so rarely
used that nobody detects errors. When an emergencie arrive
Tim Cutts wrote:
On 30 Sep 2009, at 2:23 pm, Rahul Nabar wrote:
I like the shared socket approach. Building a separate IPMI network
seems a lot of extra wiring to me. Admittedly the IPMI switches can be
configured to be dirt cheap but it still feels like building a extra
tiny road for one car
Hearns, John wrote:
Are you happy with the IPMI on Supermicro? I've been unable to
personally test a KVM + remote media IPMI from them,
Eugen, I think you're aksing that one of me?
I'm very, very happy with IPMI on SGI equipment. Rock solid reliability,
and you can power cycle blades/IRUs/ent
(a) a separate eth cable coming out of each server that takes the IPMI packets
yes.
(b) or are the packets pushed out over the primary eth cable already
consolidated at the eth card?
I don't have any of these shared configs, but they exist.
I'm not clear on how well they work. obviously IP
Hello!
Quoting (30.09.09 16:19):
> Yes, but the tiny road is still useable by the emergency services when
> there's been a pileup on the main cariageway, and there are wreckage
> and bodies everywhere!
I allready saw a lot of Beowulfs where the management network is so rarely
used that nobody d
Are you happy with the IPMI on Supermicro? I've been unable to
personally test a KVM + remote media IPMI from them,
Eugen, I think you're aksing that one of me?
I'm very, very happy with IPMI on SGI equipment. Rock solid reliability,
and you can power cycle blades/IRUs/entire racks when you're
On Wed, Sep 30, 2009 at 08:58:22AM -0500, Rahul Nabar wrote:
> > By the way, which hardware do you use?
>
> Dell in the past. This time around still comparing vendors.
Are you happy with the IPMI on Supermicro? I've been unable to
personally test a KVM + remote media IPMI from them, especially
On 30 Sep 2009, at 2:23 pm, Rahul Nabar wrote:
I like the shared socket approach. Building a separate IPMI network
seems a lot of extra wiring to me. Admittedly the IPMI switches can be
configured to be dirt cheap but it still feels like building a extra
tiny road for one car a day when a huge
Rahul Nabar wrote:
On Wed, Sep 30, 2009 at 8:19 AM, Hearns, John wrote:
It depends. Supermicro use the shared-socket approach (actually it is a bridge
somewhere on the motherboard), or with Supermicro you can have a separate
socket using a little cable with a minu-USB connector onto the IPMI c
Dell in the past. This time around still comparing vendors.
Dell refer to IPMI management as 'DRAC', not to be confused with
http://www.drac.org.uk/
BTW, if you really don't like extra network cabling and choosing
Ethernet switches,
why not go for a blade solution?
The contents of this email ar
On Wed, Sep 30, 2009 at 8:30 AM, Hearns, John wrote:
>
> By the way, which hardware do you use?
Dell in the past. This time around still comparing vendors.
--
Rahul
___
Beowulf mailing list, Beowulf@beowulf.org sponsored by Penguin Computing
To chang
Hearns, John wrote:
I like the shared socket approach. Building a separate IPMI network
seems a lot of extra wiring to me. Admittedly the IPMI switches can be
configured to be dirt cheap but it still feels like building a extra
tiny road for one car a day when a huge highway with spare capacity
e
I like the shared socket approach. Building a separate IPMI network
seems a lot of extra wiring to me. Admittedly the IPMI switches can be
configured to be dirt cheap but it still feels like building a extra
tiny road for one car a day when a huge highway with spare capacity
exists right next door
On Wed, Sep 30, 2009 at 8:19 AM, Hearns, John wrote:
> It depends. Supermicro use the shared-socket approach (actually it is a bridge
> somewhere on the motherboard), or with Supermicro you can have a separate
> socket using a little cable with a minu-USB connector onto the IPMI card.
> Other man
> thank goodness for lan IPMI (bios, serial console redirection) - it keeps me
> out of the machineroom 99% of the time. heck, it keeps me out of the dozen
> other machinerooms that our ~30 clusters are in.
I am still a bit confused about the exact config. Trying to clarify the picture!
Question
On Wed, Sep 30, 2009 at 1:26 AM, Mark Hahn wrote:
>
>> Note that for my head nodes etc. I do plan on having a small (4 port)
>> KVM in the main rack with its console and rackmount keyboard. I guess
>
> not worth it imo - I'd use the crash cart, since the need is so rare.
Good point! If "IPMI ove
On Wed, Sep 30, 2009 at 1:26 AM, Mark Hahn wrote:
> thank goodness for lan IPMI (bios, serial console redirection) - it keeps me
> out of the machineroom 99% of the time. heck, it keeps me out of the dozen
> other machinerooms that our ~30 clusters are in.
I am still a bit confused about the ex
On Wed, Sep 30, 2009 at 1:30 AM, Beat Rubischon wrote:
> One of the best solutions I saw so far was a KVM drawer in one rack with a
> small KVM switch and a single, long cable per rack. Open the rack, attach
> the cable and you're done. Moving a cart through a typical datacenter with
> cables, bo
On Wed, Sep 30, 2009 at 3:27 AM, Hearns, John wrote:
>
> And Rahul, are you not talking to vendors who are telling you about
> their remote management and
> node imaging capabilities? By vendors, I do not mean your local Tier 1
> salesman, who sells servers to normal businesses
> and corporations
On Wed, 2009-09-30 at 08:30 +0200, Beat Rubischon wrote:
> Hello!
>
> One of the best solutions I saw so far was a KVM drawer in one rack with a
> small KVM switch and a single, long cable per rack. Open the rack, attach
> the cable and you're done. Moving a cart through a typical datacenter with
Most decent nodes will have IPMI and kvm over IP built in. That and a
reasonable serial concentrator will make your admins lives *much*
easier.
I agree wholeheartedly with what Joe says.
And Rahul, are you not talking to vendors who are telling you about
their remote management and
node imagin
Actually, it is not GAMESS which is causing the problem but Molpro. The
reason
why it needs that much space is simply the size of the molecule and the
functional ( CCSD(T) ). Both are not in favour of a fast job with little
scratch space. I don't think there is much I can do in terms of the
pro
24 matches
Mail list logo
