Ok, so you want two different clusters running on the same scheduler? That can work, especially if they are the same architecture. If they are different it can work too, I would just think it would be more confusing for the users. I would personally just make them log into a different place so they don't try to use the 32 bit executables on the 64 bit machines, but that is just me.
If you aren't running data back and forth between the two clusters, then for most switches all you have to do is connect the two racks of switches together with a normal cable. If that doesn't work try a cross-over cable, but most switches are smart enough to realize what they are attached to and do the cross over themselves. Then you just make a separate queue on the main cluster's scheduler for the secondary cluster, once you make sure the two clusters can see each other. OSCAR can't do this for you though, you'll have to use the config files OSCAR made as an example and make the new configs by hand. Others with more experience at building clusters by hand may be able to give more intelligent advice than this. It has been a long time since I used anything but OSCAR. Heterogenious clustering is easy, you just start over and include all the nodes from both clusters in your new OSCAR cluster. The only tricky part is to make sure you have enough data bandwidth between the two switches for your data load. For the cluster I bought that had multiple switches they used four connections I think, and I have seen more complex setups that used more when there were more than two switches. That is way outside my expertise though. On Fri, Dec 26, 2008 at 12:14 PM, Ali Nazemian <alinazem...@gmail.com> wrote: > What about heterogeneous clustering?! i want to do that for load balancing > with these two cluster network , one of them has high job traffic but > another one has small amount of job running. > what if both was same?! i mean homogeneous clustering?! what should i do on > that case?! ( i can make both of them same if its impossible for connect > them in heterogeneous way) > > On Fri, Dec 26, 2008 at 6:16 PM, Michael Edwards <miedw...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> The problem is that you won't really have a more powerful cluster >> network. If they are the same architecture but different speeds then >> the fast ones will be idle a lot waiting for the slow ones to finish. >> If they are different architectures, then you won't be able to run the >> same copy of the code on both machines and it will probably just not >> work. >> >> It isn't really that it isn't possible, it is more that it isn't >> usually a good idea. In my opinion, of course. >> >> On Fri, Dec 26, 2008 at 3:32 AM, Ali Nazemian <alinazem...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> > They aren't same , i want to connect them to each other for having more >> > powerful cluster network , i want to add them two oscar cluster network >> > and >> > build a bigger one, but i cant put them on same switch so i should do >> > that >> > remotely. >> > How can i do that if its outside the oscar framework?! can you guide >> > me?! >> > Cheers. >> > >> > On Fri, Dec 26, 2008 at 4:04 AM, Michael Edwards <miedw...@gmail.com> >> > wrote: >> >> >> >> Are they the same architecture and roughly the same clock speed? >> >> >> >> If not then sharing resources will be difficult. Unless you mean >> >> network drives and such. >> >> >> >> Not clear what you mean by "sharing resources". It will be outside >> >> the "oscar framework" in any event. You could put them all on the >> >> same switch and rebuild the clusters into one cluster fairly easily, >> >> but thats about as far as "oscar" will go. >> >> >> >> On Thu, Dec 25, 2008 at 4:40 PM, Ali Nazemian <alinazem...@gmail.com> >> >> wrote: >> >> > Hi , >> >> > I want to connect two cluster network that each use oscar 5 , in a >> >> > way >> >> > that >> >> > can share their resources, how can i do that? do you know any tip for >> >> > that?! >> >> > regards. >> >> > >> >> > -- >> >> > A.Nazemian >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> >> > >> >> > _______________________________________________ >> >> > Oscar-users mailing list >> >> > Oscar-users@lists.sourceforge.net >> >> > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/oscar-users >> >> > >> >> > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> >> _______________________________________________ >> >> Oscar-users mailing list >> >> Oscar-users@lists.sourceforge.net >> >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/oscar-users >> > >> > >> > >> > -- >> > A.Nazemian >> > >> > >> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> > >> > _______________________________________________ >> > Oscar-users mailing list >> > Oscar-users@lists.sourceforge.net >> > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/oscar-users >> > >> > >> >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> _______________________________________________ >> Oscar-users mailing list >> Oscar-users@lists.sourceforge.net >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/oscar-users > > > > -- > A.Nazemian > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > Oscar-users mailing list > Oscar-users@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/oscar-users > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ _______________________________________________ Oscar-users mailing list Oscar-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/oscar-users
