>Rich Sudlow wrote: >> In the past we've used cyclades console servers for serial >> interfaces into our cluster nodes. >> >> We're replacing 360 nodes which couldn't do SOL with 360 >> which could. >> >> Now that we can do SOL is that a better to use that instead of the >> Cyclades? >> >> Thoughts? > >Every now and then IPMI gets wedged. We have seen it on all IPMI >stacks. When IPMI gets wedged, SOL stops working. > >I recommend redundant administrative pathways ... make sure you can get >to and control the machine in the event of a problem. Some pathways may >not be as cost effective at scale than others.
I suggest that if you are already comfortable with Cyclades Terminal servers and already have them configured plus all the cables are already there, then why not continue to use them. I guess you already use the feature where they can write the console logs to a NFS mounted filesystem? Redundant pathways are always a bonus. However here you might have problems in having effectively 2 simulatenous serial consoles. Daniel
_______________________________________________ Beowulf mailing list, [email protected] sponsored by Penguin Computing To change your subscription (digest mode or unsubscribe) visit http://www.beowulf.org/mailman/listinfo/beowulf
