On Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 01:14:39AM -0500, Mark Hahn wrote:
> > At some point, light speed becomes the limiting factor, and for that,
> > reducing physical size is important.
>
> we're quite a way away from that. I don't see a lot of pressure to
> improve fabrics below 1 us latency (or so), ie,
> "consumer" products. And then, there's the "Win on Sunday, sell on
> Monday" effect, which I don't think needs any explanation.
there's a premise here which I think is mistaken. this theory depends
on the F1 circuit having a very different cost-effectiveness requirement.
that team X will spend
>> Commodity mother boards are similar or equal to supercomputer
>> hardware.
uh, sorta.
first, ECC. when I'm feeling particularly surly, I'd claim that ECC
is not commodity - it's smaller volume, higher price, almost unheard
of in the high-volume (consumer) market. (which is appropriate,
since
On 11/28/12 8:18 AM, "Alan Louis Scheinine"
wrote:
>
>Prentice writes:
>> An even more cynical view say that the HPC vendors lobby the government
>> to believe exascale is important so the government invests in it and
>> subsidizes their R&D.
>
>Whether a few big exaflops computer or many teraf
On 11/28/2012 02:17 AM, Mark Hahn wrote:
>
> I don't think either Gb or IB are a good match for the many/little
> approach being discussed. SiCortex was pretty focused on providing
> an appropriate network, though the buying public didn't seem to
> appreciate the nuance.
>
... and those who did a
You might want to post in beowulf mailing list see cc
and you want to install linux of course.
OpenFabrics releases openmpi, yet it only works at a limited number
of distributions - most important is having
the correct kernel (usually old kernel).
I'm gonna try get it to work at debian soon.
On Nov 28, 2012, at 10:47 PM, Prentice Bisbal wrote:
> On 11/28/2012 11:27 AM, Vincent Diepeveen wrote:
>>
>> On Nov 28, 2012, at 4:30 PM, Prentice Bisbal wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> On 11/27/2012 07:32 PM, Vincent Diepeveen wrote:
On Nov 28, 2012, at 12:17 AM, Prentice Bisbal wrote:
>
>
On 11/28/2012 11:27 AM, Vincent Diepeveen wrote:
>
> On Nov 28, 2012, at 4:30 PM, Prentice Bisbal wrote:
>
>>
>> On 11/27/2012 07:32 PM, Vincent Diepeveen wrote:
>>>
>>> On Nov 28, 2012, at 12:17 AM, Prentice Bisbal wrote:
>>>
On 11/27/2012 03:37 PM, Douglas Eadline wrote:
>
>> My
John Hearns wrote:
>
>
> http://www.zdnet.com/intel-preparing-to-put-an-end-to-user-replaceable-cpus-708024/
>
> Class, discuss.
Currently one can buy a motherboard and then select one of many
processors that fit it, based on
price/performance tradeoffs. So if there are 4 mobos and 5 proces
1) We ran a 10,000-node cluster on Amazon EC2 for Grid Engine
scalability testing a few weeks ago:
http://blogs.scalablelogic.com/2012/11/running-1-node-grid-engine-cluster.html
We received lots of help from the Amazon guys, and we (= Open Grid
Scheduler & Scalable Logic) wouldn't be able to
On Nov 28, 2012, at 5:18 PM, Alan Louis Scheinine wrote:
>
> Prentice writes:
>> An even more cynical view say that the HPC vendors lobby the
>> government
>> to believe exascale is important so the government invests in it and
>> subsidizes their R&D.
>
> Whether a few big exaflops computer or
On Nov 28, 2012, at 4:30 PM, Prentice Bisbal wrote:
>
> On 11/27/2012 07:32 PM, Vincent Diepeveen wrote:
>>
>> On Nov 28, 2012, at 12:17 AM, Prentice Bisbal wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> On 11/27/2012 03:37 PM, Douglas Eadline wrote:
> My interest in Arm has been the flip side of balancing flops to
Prentice writes:
> An even more cynical view say that the HPC vendors lobby the government
> to believe exascale is important so the government invests in it and
> subsidizes their R&D.
Whether a few big exaflops computer or many teraflop computers,
the computational needs exceed what is now av
On 11/28/2012 02:17 AM, Mark Hahn wrote:
>
> as heretical as it sounds, I have to ask: where is the need for exaflop?
> I'm a bit skeptical about the import of the extreme high end of HPC -
> or to but it another way, I think much of the real action is in jobs
> that are only a few teraflops in s
On 11/27/2012 07:32 PM, Vincent Diepeveen wrote:
>
> On Nov 28, 2012, at 12:17 AM, Prentice Bisbal wrote:
>
>>
>> On 11/27/2012 03:37 PM, Douglas Eadline wrote:
>>>
My interest in Arm has been the flip side of balancing flops to
network
bandwidth. A standard dual socket (AMD or In
On 11/28/2012 09:22 AM, Hearns, John wrote:
> http://www.zdnet.com/intel-preparing-to-put-an-end-to-user-replaceable-cpus-708024/
Do we have any idea about whether or not they will even plan to release
some of their cpus in oem packaging? I.E., not on a mobo?
There are a class of modders ou
http://www.zdnet.com/intel-preparing-to-put-an-end-to-user-replaceable-cpus-708024/
Class, discuss.
John Hearns | CFD Hardware Specialist | McLaren Racing Limited
McLaren Technology Centre, Chertsey Road, Woking, Surrey GU21 4YH, UK
T: +44 (0) 1483 262000
D: +44 (0) 1483 262352
F: +44 (0
On Wed, Nov 28, 2012 at 3:21 AM, Andrew Holway wrote:
> http://ceph.com/
Ceph is a distributed object-store (RADOS) with interfaces for various
upper levels including a POSIX-interface (also called ceph). A couple of
nice features include automated replication (three by default) and objects
are
On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 06:17:55PM -0500, Prentice Bisbal wrote:
>
> On 11/27/2012 03:37 PM, Douglas Eadline wrote:
> >
> >> My interest in Arm has been the flip side of balancing flops to network
> >> bandwidth. A standard dual socket (AMD or Intel) can trivially saturate
> >> GigE. One option
Ceph is everything but a floor wax and a desert topping. It is an open-source
distributed object store that was designed to be distributed from the get-go,
El Reg was told by James Duncan, CTO at Inktank, the developer and commercial
support provider for Ceph.
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/
http://ceph.com/docs/master/rados/
Ceph looks to be a fully distributed object store.
2012/11/28 Jonathan Aquilina
>
>
> On Wed, Nov 28, 2012 at 9:21 AM, Andrew Holway wrote:
>
>> http://ceph.com/
>
>
>
> What sets ceph apart from something like CIFS or NFS in terms of file
> storage?
>
> Jona
> I'm a bit skeptical about the import of the extreme high end of HPC -
4k photorealism at 60+ fps with full physics at <1 kW footprint.
Most gamers would sell their souls for this. This isn't exascale,
but it would just use a small slice of the same pie.
Not just gamers - Trekkies too (though
On Wed, Nov 28, 2012 at 9:21 AM, Andrew Holway wrote:
> http://ceph.com/
What sets ceph apart from something like CIFS or NFS in terms of file
storage?
Jonathan Aquilina
___
Beowulf mailing list, Beowulf@beowulf.org sponsored by Penguin Computing
To
On Wed, Nov 28, 2012 at 02:17:37AM -0500, Mark Hahn wrote:
> "small pieces tightly connected", maybe. these machines offer very nice
> power-performance for those applications that can scale efficiently to
> say, tens of thousands of cores. (one rack of BGQ is 32k cores.)
Consider a silicon co
http://ceph.com/
___
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
25 matches
Mail list logo
