On Fri, Apr 17, 2009 at 04:25:40PM -0500, blstu...@bellsouth.net wrote: > Again, that's not to say that there aren't other valid motivators > for some centralized functionality. It's just that in my opinion, > we're at the point were if it's raw cycles we need, we'll have > to be looking at a large cluster and not a simple CPU server.
exactly. the main use of a cpu server for me (and many others i suspect) is running network services. it's still nice to have a machine that's always on for that (my terminals are not stable/always on enough for providing services to others). perhaps "cpu server" is a wrong name name. "service server" anyone? ;) mjl
