| 1 |
No, |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
I prefer the unionfs way. To me it is more simple to have one / for all nodes |
| 4 |
and another / for the server. |
| 5 |
|
| 6 |
Simon |
| 7 |
|
| 8 |
Le Tuesday 11 April 2006 16:13, Josh England a écrit : |
| 9 |
> Have you tried using oneSIS for going diskless? |
| 10 |
> |
| 11 |
> emerge -va onesis |
| 12 |
> |
| 13 |
> Check out http://onesis.org for more info. |
| 14 |
> |
| 15 |
> -JE |
| 16 |
> |
| 17 |
> On Tue, 2006-04-11 at 15:04 -0400, Simon-Nicolas Roth wrote: |
| 18 |
> > Hi, |
| 19 |
> > |
| 20 |
> > A small introduction: |
| 21 |
> > We currently own 2 small clusters. One with 42 opteron diskless nodes |
| 22 |
> > (adelie gentoo linux) and another one with 24 pentium 4 diskless nodes |
| 23 |
> > (based on Kyron's wiki |
| 24 |
> > http://wiki.neuralbs.com/index.php/Gentoo_Diskless_Client). |
| 25 |
> > |
| 26 |
> > We have seen a nice upgrade in perfomance when we changed the 24 nodes |
| 27 |
> > cluster from Redhat to Gentoo. |
| 28 |
> > |
| 29 |
> > The question: |
| 30 |
> > We are in discussion to make a cluster with around 1024 nodes for |
| 31 |
> > parallel scientific computing. I want to convince that Gentoo would be |
| 32 |
> > better on this cluster than RedHat! Most people around this project don't |
| 33 |
> > believe in Gentoo (obviously because they have never done anything with |
| 34 |
> > Gentoo). |
| 35 |
> > |
| 36 |
> > Does anyone have really solid arguments/articles/proofs about the |
| 37 |
> > performance of Gentoo on clusters to help me convice the RedHat guys? |
| 38 |
> > |
| 39 |
> > Thanks |
| 40 |
> > Simon |
| 41 |
|
| 42 |
-- |
| 43 |
gentoo-cluster@g.o mailing list |
Archives