On Wed, May 2, 2012 at 9:40 PM, Anne Pajon <anne.pa...@cancer.org.uk> wrote:
> Hi Peter,
> Thanks for your answer.
> No the galaxy machine is not a submitting node of the cluster.

That's probably the problem then :)

> So I suppose I do have those two options:
> (1) making the galaxy server a submitting node to the cluster
> or
> (2) install and run galaxy on a cluster node
> What would be best? Any suggestions? If (1), any ideas on
> what needs to be installed?

We went with (1), partly for historical admin reasons of
machine ownership - but also this avoided having a single
critical point with one machine running both Galaxy and
being our cluster head node (since the cluster isn't just
used for Galaxy jobs).

Regarding (2), I don't think you want Galaxy running on a
cluster compute node - Galaxy isn't that computationally
demanding but I wouldn't want the same machine to also
be running general cluster jobs. Consider a rogue job
submitted to the cluster which consumes too much RAM
and brings the node down - that can be annoying, but it
would be painful if this also killed your Galaxy server.

It might make sense to put Galaxy on your cluster head
node - which might make sharing the data drive simpler
too, depending on how your cluster is setup.

Please keep all replies on the list by using "reply all"
in your mail client.  To manage your subscriptions to this
and other Galaxy lists, please use the interface at:


Reply via email to