From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from lists.gentoo.org ([140.105.134.102] helo=robin.gentoo.org) by nuthatch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.62) (envelope-from ) id 1HriYu-0003Nt-PD for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Fri, 25 May 2007 22:47:09 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.14.0/8.14.0) with SMTP id l4PMkKcv013317; Fri, 25 May 2007 22:46:20 GMT Received: from spore.ath.cx (c-24-245-14-14.hsd1.mn.comcast.net [24.245.14.14]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.14.0/8.14.0) with ESMTP id l4PMkJVG013312 for ; Fri, 25 May 2007 22:46:19 GMT Received: from pascal.spore.ath.cx (pascal.spore.ath.cx [192.168.1.100]) by spore.ath.cx (Postfix) with ESMTP id 593C22BE0A for ; Fri, 25 May 2007 17:46:18 -0500 (CDT) Date: Fri, 25 May 2007 17:46:18 -0500 From: Dan Farrell To: gentoo-cluster@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-cluster] openmosix Message-ID: <20070525174618.539d8a67@pascal.spore.ath.cx> In-Reply-To: <46571761.9010608@cs.cmu.edu> References: <6763832255B40844894F2C905CE2852F2EFBF4@minnicksbs.MinnickWeb.loc> <4655B8BC.3000802@cs.cmu.edu> <3f85ef270705240933o30b43b7bp1cabbf7f91c6361b@mail.gmail.com> <46571761.9010608@cs.cmu.edu> Organization: Spore, Ltd. X-Mailer: Claws Mail 2.9.1 (GTK+ 2.10.6; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-cluster@gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-cluster@lists.gentoo.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Archives-Salt: de22aebd-d55b-4d56-9b4c-0fc98cde9372 X-Archives-Hash: 910d8778551d3c6972297e928278ad1a On Fri, 25 May 2007 13:05:37 -0400 Ted Rodgers wrote: > Afaik, xen tools are only for virtual hosts, which wouldn't help us=20 > much. Our lab machines get hit pretty hard by matlab users, so it's > not something that would virtualize well. The current setup isn't > really clustered at all, it's a rack and lab setup sharing home > directories and automounts using NIS. I liked the idea of letting > something like openmosix doing workload balancing between machines > without having to write wrapper scripts around the jobs. >=20 > The ideal setup would have one machine were students/researchers log=20 > into, fire up the process, then have a management tool that > determines where it runs. Users logging into random machines to run > their jobs means sometimes 5 machines are idle while another machine > is heavily loaded. A central login point would also allow us to > restrict direct access to all the other machines. >=20 > Ted >=20 >=20 >=20 >=20 >=20 > Jos=E9 Costa wrote: > > Well, have you tried with Linux-HA using Xen OCF Resource Agent? > > > > On 5/24/07, Ted Rodgers wrote: > >> Joshua Morris wrote: > >> > What other alternatives are there? Can anyone share their=20 > >> installation > >> > tips and help some of us that are new to clustering but familiar > >> > with Gentoo. I am looking to build something when I can run > >> > multiple=20 > >> vm's on > >> > a cluster and load balance the vm's across the cluster. Anyone > >> > doing anything similar to this? > >> > > >> > Thank you, > >> > Joshua > >> > > >> We've been asking the same question where I work. We're wanting to > >> re-do and increase performance in a few lab setups and thought > >> openmosix would be a great option. If there aren't tools > >> available for a 2.6 kernel, we may have to keep using the current > >> setup: NIS / NFS / autofs / afs setup with users loging in to > >> specific machines. One group tried condor, but really isn't happy > >> with it at all. > >> > >> Any suggestions? > >> > >> Ted Rodgers > >> Robotics, CMU > >> --=20 > >> gentoo-cluster@gentoo.org mailing list > >> > >> >=20 Couldn't you implement a rudimentary load-balancing system with multiple cname entries in dns? -- gentoo-cluster@gentoo.org mailing list