> Subject: Re: What would you like in DF 1.8? Newsgroups: dragonfly.users Date: Tue, 18 Jul 2006 15:20:06 +0200 References: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> User-Agent: KNode/0.8.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Lines: 34 NNTP-Posting-Host: 82.227.32.26 X-Trace: 1153228808 crater_reader.dragonflybsd.org 776 82.227.32.26 Xref: crater_reader.dragonflybsd.org dragonfly.users:6491
Steve O'Hara-Smith wrote: > > Well since all of that can be obtained elsewhere I would be very > happy to see it stacked behind the clustering behaviour that Matt has > already outlined as the primary goal because that *cannot* be obtained > elsewhere. > I must be dreaming, what are running all those high performance clusters which appear in the Top500, and are supposed to be based on Linux? Perhaps something like http://openssi.org/cgi-bin/view?page=features.html I could not swear it, but from memory it is more than 5 years and perhaps much more than functional solutions exist for Linux, with all kernel hooks and much more than have been proposed here. Not to mention older distributed computing projects like amoeba by Tanenbaum. And by the way, who has the money to run such clusters, besides big corporations and big academic labs? How much does cost Myrinet and other Infiniband hardware necessary to ensure low enough latency so that distributed computing has a small chance of being a realistic proposition? The present and foreseable future of affordable computing is multiprocessor machines, with perhaps up to 32 virtual processors (Sun machines). Being scalable on such hardware is a realistic goal, Solaris does it, Linux does it, both using traditional solutions. Maybe Dragonfly can do it with innovative solutions. > PS. Can I have the bikeshed in sky blue pink with yellow dots. > -- Michel Talon
