DELL 1955 'Blade Server' - Hardware

This is a discussion on DELL 1955 'Blade Server' - Hardware ; We are about to get a demo of the DELL Poweredge 1955. 4 Blades, 4 cores each/8Gb RAM 2 x 73Gb SAS drives, etc. I have to choose between SUS EL10 and RH AS 4. Anyone have any input as ...

+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 5 of 5

Thread: DELL 1955 'Blade Server'

  1. DELL 1955 'Blade Server'

    We are about to get a demo of the DELL Poweredge 1955. 4 Blades, 4
    cores each/8Gb RAM 2 x 73Gb SAS drives, etc. I have to choose between
    SUS EL10 and RH AS 4. Anyone have any input as to which would be better
    and why? I have years of Linux experience, but I have never done any
    clustering of any kind.

    Thanks!


  2. Re: DELL 1955 'Blade Server'

    jcluthe@gmail.com wrote:

    > We are about to get a demo of the DELL Poweredge 1955. 4 Blades, 4
    > cores each/8Gb RAM 2 x 73Gb SAS drives, etc. I have to choose between
    > SUS EL10 and RH AS 4. Anyone have any input as to which would be better
    > and why?


    Depends on many factors, but off the top I would say go with Red Hat - they
    have had support for this stuff for a long time.

    > I have years of Linux experience, but I have never done any
    > clustering of any kind.


    Blade server does not automatically mean clustering - they are completely
    self-contained servers, and could conceivable each run a standalone LAMP
    system, or SQL server, or whatever.
    They're just very space-efficient, but there are versions that come with
    built-in fibrechannel - which is a better indication of clustering than
    just the fact that they're blades.

    If you *want* to do clustering, you need to decide whether you need load
    balancing (network clustering) or application clustering, i.e. Mosix or
    Beowulf.

    If you need to run one application fast, Mosix will blow your mind.

    There is a CD-runnable version of Knoppix that can do OpenMosix.
    It's called ClusterKnoppix - give it a try.


    --
    All your bits are belong to us.

  3. Re: DELL 1955 'Blade Server'

    Sorry I wasn't clear. I do *want* to do clustering. I do want to run
    one application fast in this case.

    So, knowing that, would one be better off running RedHat AS 4 or SUSE
    EL10?

    Price is not nearly as much of an issue as ease of use.

    Thanks


    Jeroen Geilman wrote:
    > jcluthe@gmail.com wrote:
    >
    > > We are about to get a demo of the DELL Poweredge 1955. 4 Blades, 4
    > > cores each/8Gb RAM 2 x 73Gb SAS drives, etc. I have to choose between
    > > SUS EL10 and RH AS 4. Anyone have any input as to which would be better
    > > and why?

    >
    > Depends on many factors, but off the top I would say go with Red Hat - they
    > have had support for this stuff for a long time.
    >
    > > I have years of Linux experience, but I have never done any
    > > clustering of any kind.

    >
    > Blade server does not automatically mean clustering - they are completely
    > self-contained servers, and could conceivable each run a standalone LAMP
    > system, or SQL server, or whatever.
    > They're just very space-efficient, but there are versions that come with
    > built-in fibrechannel - which is a better indication of clustering than
    > just the fact that they're blades.
    >
    > If you *want* to do clustering, you need to decide whether you need load
    > balancing (network clustering) or application clustering, i.e. Mosix or
    > Beowulf.
    >
    > If you need to run one application fast, Mosix will blow your mind.
    >
    > There is a CD-runnable version of Knoppix that can do OpenMosix.
    > It's called ClusterKnoppix - give it a try.
    >
    >
    > --
    > All your bits are belong to us.



  4. Re: DELL 1955 'Blade Server'

    jcluthe@gmail.com wrote:

    > Sorry I wasn't clear. I do *want* to do clustering. I do want to run
    > one application fast in this case.
    >
    > So, knowing that, would one be better off running RedHat AS 4 or SUSE
    > EL10?
    >
    > Price is not nearly as much of an issue as ease of use.
    >


    In that case, check their respective software support - I've never used SuSE
    EL so can't tell you what it can or can't do, or how it looks if it does.

    The support available for application clustering should be well-documented
    on each.


    --
    All your bits are belong to us.

  5. Re: DELL 1955 'Blade Server'

    "jcluthe@gmail.com" wrote:
    > Sorry I wasn't clear. I do *want* to do clustering.


    So what kind of clustering do you want?

    > I do want to run one application fast in this case.


    Is that single application multithreaded? Will you be running multiple
    instances of that single application? What kind of application is this?
    Does it do a lot of calculations on a small amount of data or does it
    handle a lot of data?

    Once you have identified what kind of problem you are trying to solve you
    might find a good solution. If you are running a single instance of a
    single application the only use of a cluster you might get is some kind of
    failover functionality.

    If your application only has a few threads and is run in a single instance
    you will not benefit from a cluster if it handles a lot of data. Instead
    you would be better off with a single machine with many CPU cores.

    > So,knowing that, would one be better off running RedHat AS 4 or SUSE
    > EL10?


    We still don't know enough to identify a good solution, but most likely it
    will not matter much wich distribution you choose. Almost any distribution
    can be configured for almost any task. The choice of the distribution
    should be left to the persion(s) who are supposed to administer the
    machines. They will make a choice based on personal preferences for a
    favorite distribution coming previous varying experiences from different
    distributions.

    The users of the machines should give a list of requirements on the
    installation. These requirements could be something like need to have
    application X and application Y of at least version A.B and need to work
    together with functionality Z in our current network infrastructure. A
    system administrator with some experience knows to add some extra
    requirements like need to be able to fast re-create an installation and
    need routines to send out patches.

    regards Henrik
    --
    The address in the header is only to prevent spam. My real address is:
    hc8(at)uthyres.com Examples of addresses which go to spammers:
    root@variousus.net root@localhost


+ Reply to Thread