|
I certainly didn't say Grid Engine is buggy, at least not in
comparison. But there are bugs, and tough ones on top. A lot has
been fixed for u5 and then 80 more for Univa Grid Engine 8.0.0.
There are still bugs, of course, or performance restricting
issues. An if you run a production environment on which your users
depend then having not only a number to call but also the
deep-level experts behind that number does not sound like such a
bad idea, if you ask me. You also may forgive me if I point out that the relative stability you are experiencing is because of a certain group of people who stood behind the product for all those years. So ... Cheers, Fritz Am 08.09.11 11:54, schrieb William Hay: We're currently running 6.2u3 on our cluster. We should really upgrade this to something more current. In particular we want to move to something with support for the -tc and -binding options to qsub. While in theory we could just grab 6.2u5 which has the features that we need right now we'd like to move to a version with forward momentum. The question is which version?We had Fritz Ferstl in yesterday to explain Univa's commercial offering and what they offer over and above the common core. Fritz also explained that contrary to our experience Grid engine is really buggy, unstable and hard to debug so we really need a support contract with them:) Does anyone want to sing the praises and explain the advantage of the various other variants of Grid engine out there (Univa's open core, Oracle Grid Engine, Open Grid Scheduler, the Love child variant or even using some linux distro which includes an SGE variant)? William _______________________________________________ users mailing list [email protected] https://gridengine.org/mailman/listinfo/users --
|
Fritz Ferstl | CTO and Business
Development, EMEA
_______________________________________________ users mailing list [email protected] https://gridengine.org/mailman/listinfo/users
