John R Pierce wrote:
On 03/07/12 2:09 PM, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
Heh. Many of the new servers we are getting are all on the order of 48 or
64 cores, and they eat and drink power. The same UPS that would handle six
4 or 8 core boxes can handle*three*, if we're lucky, when a clustering
job's
On 03/08/12 4:39 AM, mark wrote:
VM's? Sorry, we're doing very serious scientific computing - the couple
or so VMs we had are going away. I mean, when, for example, one guy I
support gets on a 48 core box, and proceeds to fire up an R job, and
uses*all* of them Plus, we're running out of
On Mar 7, 2012, at 7:48 PM, Ljubomir Ljubojevic off...@plnet.rs wrote:
We are talking about *software* /boot partition on RAID1! that can have
any number of member partitions. And the rest of the disk here discussed
is *software* mdraid RAID10 with 1,2,3,4,... member partitions, not
John R Pierce wrote:
On 03/08/12 4:39 AM, mark wrote:
VM's? Sorry, we're doing very serious scientific computing - the couple
or so VMs we had are going away. I mean, when, for example, one guy I
support gets on a 48 core box, and proceeds to fire up an R job, and
uses*all* of them Plus,
On Thu, Mar 8, 2012 at 8:33 AM, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
VM's? Sorry, we're doing very serious scientific computing - the couple
or so VMs we had are going away. I mean, when, for example, one guy I
support gets on a 48 core box, and proceeds to fire up an R job, and
uses*all* of them
On Thursday, March 08, 2012 10:52:02 AM Les Mikesell wrote:
Yes, part of the power savings are deceptive - they only kick in when
the CPUs are idle and your users would be one of the rare cases that
peg them for long intervals. I think this is getting better in the
current generation but
On Mar 8, 2012, at 11:06 AM, Lamar Owen lo...@pari.edu wrote:
On Thursday, March 08, 2012 10:52:02 AM Les Mikesell wrote:
Yes, part of the power savings are deceptive - they only kick in when
the CPUs are idle and your users would be one of the rare cases that
peg them for long intervals. I
On 03/08/2012 02:03 PM, Ross Walker wrote:
On Mar 7, 2012, at 7:48 PM, Ljubomir Ljubojevicoff...@plnet.rs wrote:
We are talking about *software* /boot partition on RAID1! that can have
any number of member partitions. And the rest of the disk here discussed
is *software* mdraid RAID10 with
On Wednesday, March 07, 2012 05:06:13 PM Les Mikesell wrote:
It's not such a big deal for desktops, but you can get small low power
systems if you look around - or just use a laptop that will sleep when
you close the lid.
FWIW, Aleutia (www.aleutia.com) makes some nice really low power units.
On Thursday, March 08, 2012 12:37:30 PM Ross Walker wrote:
On Mar 8, 2012, at 11:06 AM, Lamar Owen lo...@pari.edu wrote:
I live in the same sort of world, just on a smaller scale, and my biggest
power consumer is storage, not compute, but I thoroughly understand Mark's
points.
So, get
On Thu, Mar 8, 2012 at 11:37 AM, Ross Walker rswwal...@gmail.com wrote:
I live in the same sort of world, just on a smaller scale, and my biggest
power consumer is storage, not compute, but I thoroughly understand Mark's
points.
So, get more power and UPS.
The specs are published, so
On Thursday, March 08, 2012 01:15:59 PM Les Mikesell wrote:
Usually your whole building is designed around a certain amount of
heat load and data centers designed a few years back are probably
already maxed out due to the earlier rounds of density increases. So
you will need at least more A/C
On 03/08/12 6:33 AM, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
ok, so 3 x 48/64 core servers uses the same power as 6 x 4/8 core ?
thats still major win.
Um, no - that's what I'm saying is*not* the case. The new suckers drink
power - using a UPS that I could hang, say, 6 Dell 1950's off of,*if* I'm
John R Pierce wrote:
On 03/08/12 6:33 AM, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
ok, so 3 x 48/64 core servers uses the same power as 6 x 4/8 core ?
thats still major win.
Um, no - that's what I'm saying is*not* the case. The new suckers drink
power - using a UPS that I could hang, say, 6 Dell 1950's
On Thu, Mar 08, 2012 at 02:51:58PM -0500, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
John R Pierce wrote:
On 03/08/12 6:33 AM, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
ok, so 3 x 48/64 core servers uses the same power as 6 x 4/8 core ?
thats still major win.
Um, no - that's what I'm saying is*not* the case. The new
On 03/08/12 11:51 AM, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
I'm sorry, but to me, the above is a non sequitur. I was talking about how
much power the servers drink, and that the UPSs that I have can barely,
barely handle half as many or less, and I'm running out of UPSs, and out
of power outlets for them in
On Mar 8, 2012, at 1:12 PM, Lamar Owen lo...@pari.edu wrote:
On Thursday, March 08, 2012 12:37:30 PM Ross Walker wrote:
On Mar 8, 2012, at 11:06 AM, Lamar Owen lo...@pari.edu wrote:
I live in the same sort of world, just on a smaller scale, and my biggest
power consumer is storage, not
well ubuntu allows me to boot from MD RAID10...so there's something they
are doing that allows that to boot. I think RH needs to take a cue in that
areaI'm not going to reconfigure my entire array to accommodate centos
in this instance. if i don't need MDRAID 10 boot then this machine will
On Wed, Mar 7, 2012 at 9:49 AM, William Warren
hescomins...@emmanuelcomputerconsulting.com wrote:
well ubuntu allows me to boot from MD RAID10...so there's something they
are doing that allows that to boot.
That ubuntu version has probably switched to grub2. Good luck
debugging it when it
On Mar 7, 2012, at 11:02 AM, Les Mikesell lesmikes...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Mar 7, 2012 at 9:49 AM, William Warren
hescomins...@emmanuelcomputerconsulting.com wrote:
well ubuntu allows me to boot from MD RAID10...so there's something they
are doing that allows that to boot.
That ubuntu
Ross Walker wrote:
On Mar 7, 2012, at 11:02 AM, Les Mikesell lesmikes...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Mar 7, 2012 at 9:49 AM, William Warren
hescomins...@emmanuelcomputerconsulting.com wrote:
well ubuntu allows me to boot from MD RAID10...so there's something
they are doing that allows that to
the problem with that is when your boot drive dies your can't boot...with
ubuntu at least if any drive dies i can stilll boot off of the other 3..:)
On Wed, Mar 7, 2012 at 12:40 PM, Ross Walker rswwal...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mar 7, 2012, at 11:02 AM, Les Mikesell lesmikes...@gmail.com wrote:
the problem with that is when your boot drive dies your can't boot...with
ubuntu at least if any drive dies i can stilll boot off of the other 3..:)
You don't need a boot drive, you only need a *boot partition*.
So, you create a small *boot partition* with RAID1 and then allocate the
rest of
i then have to redo my entire array...and loose space inside the
array. Plus if i raid1 it then i only have two bootable disks..at
least this way i have 4 bootable disks..:)
Lose space? 100 or 200MB? Why the heck wouldn't you be able to spare 100
or 200MB of the gigantic size of today's
On 7.3.2012 19:08, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
Ross Walker wrote:
On Mar 7, 2012, at 11:02 AM, Les Mikesell
lesmikesell-re5jqeeqqe8avxtiumw...@public.gmane.org wrote:
On Wed, Mar 7, 2012 at 9:49 AM, William Warren
hescominsoon-dGSttIWD7Blt2rXhg/qq1lelw3d7xbbmmrmqpfiv...@public.gmane.org
Plus if i raid1 it then i only have two bootable disks..at least
this way i have 4 bootable disks..:)
No, you don't have 4. Please study the way a RAID10 array works.
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
On Wed, Mar 7, 2012 at 12:28 PM, William Warren
hescomins...@emmanuelcomputerconsulting.com wrote:
the problem with that is when your boot drive dies your can't boot...with
ubuntu at least if any drive dies i can stilll boot off of the other 3..:)
You can make a raid1 with 4 members if you
Markus Falb wrote:
On 7.3.2012 19:08, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
Ross Walker wrote:
On Mar 7, 2012, at 11:02 AM, Les Mikesell
lesmikesell-re5jqeeqqe8avxtiumw...@public.gmane.org wrote:
On Wed, Mar 7, 2012 at 9:49 AM, William Warren
On Wed, Mar 7, 2012 at 2:01 PM, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
You may have noticed that redhat recommends 250M
http://docs.redhat.com/docs/en-US/Red_Hat_Enterprise_Linux/6/html/Installation_Guide/s2-diskpartrecommend-x86.html
Yeah, well, some of us have many servers more than 4 yrs old; so I'm
Les Mikesell wrote:
On Wed, Mar 7, 2012 at 2:01 PM, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
You may have noticed that redhat recommends 250M
http://docs.redhat.com/docs/en-US/Red_Hat_Enterprise_Linux/6/html/Installation_Guide/s2-diskpartrecommend-x86.html
Yeah, well, some of us have many servers more than
On Wed, Mar 7, 2012 at 2:09 PM, Reindl Harald h.rei...@thelounge.net wrote:
If the future continues anything like the past, you'll be be able to
buy something new with twice the speed and 10x the space by then and
be better off starting over than allocating more than you need today.
you are
On Wed, Mar 7, 2012 at 2:23 PM, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
If the future continues anything like the past, you'll be be able to
buy something new with twice the speed and 10x the space by then and
be better off starting over than allocating more than you need today.
a) You think I, or a *lot*
Les Mikesell wrote:
On Wed, Mar 7, 2012 at 2:23 PM, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
If the future continues anything like the past, you'll be be able to
buy something new with twice the speed and 10x the space by then and
be better off starting over than allocating more than you need today.
a) You
On Wed, Mar 7, 2012 at 3:23 PM, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
a) You think I, or a *lot* of other folks, are going to do that at home?
(Please - I'm trying to get my fiancee to at *least* go from
*shudder* Vista to Win7)
If you leave them on, add up the power cost of running an old
Les Mikesell wrote:
On Wed, Mar 7, 2012 at 3:23 PM, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
a) You think I, or a *lot* of other folks, are going to do that at
home? (Please - I'm trying to get my fiancee to at *least* go from
*shudder* Vista to Win7)
If you leave them on, add up the power cost of
Les Mikesell wrote:
On Wed, Mar 7, 2012 at 3:23 PM, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
a) You think I, or a *lot* of other folks, are going to do that at
home? (Please - I'm trying to get my fiancee to at *least* go from
*shudder* Vista to Win7)
If you leave them on, add up the power cost of
On 03/07/12 2:09 PM, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
Heh. Many of the new servers we are getting are all on the order of 48 or
64 cores, and they eat and drink power. The same UPS that would handle six
4 or 8 core boxes can handle*three*, if we're lucky, when a clustering
job's running
yes but
On 03/07/2012 07:43 PM, Miguel Medalha wrote:
Plus if i raid1 it then i only have two bootable disks..at least
this way i have 4 bootable disks..:)
No, you don't have 4. Please study the way a RAID10 array works.
___
CentOS mailing list
On Tue, Mar 6, 2012 at 9:29 AM, William Warren
hescomins...@emmanuelcomputerconsulting.com wrote:
why will Centos 6 not boot from an mdraid 10 partition?
It has to load code before you have the kernel that understands raid
or how to detect it. That's why they call it booting.
--
Les
39 matches
Mail list logo
