Thread: RE: [SSI-users] homogenous hardware?
Brought to you by:
brucewalker,
rogertsang
From: Walker, B. J <bru...@hp...> - 2004-08-31 14:44:33
|
OpenSSI does not require homogeneous hardware except to the extent that all the nodes must run the same instruction set (run the same command set - there is only one root filesystem and it has a set of command binaries for a given instruction set). At the latest LinuxWorld conference in San Francisco we demo'd on 3 vastly different blade nodes, some UP and some SMP. I believe we run the SMP kernel on all (it automatically adjusts if it is running on a UP). There is some chance you could run 64bit machines in a 32-bit cluster if they could execute all the 32-bit binaries. However, we currently don't support this. Bruce P.s. if ab > -----Original Message----- > From: ssi...@li...=20 > [mailto:ssi...@li...] On=20 > Behalf Of smee > Sent: Tuesday, August 31, 2004 7:30 AM > To: ssi...@li... > Subject: [SSI-users] homogenous hardware? >=20 >=20 > I have another question (on a roll tonight). >=20 > This might be a silly question, but here goes: > Does openssi require that all nodes within a cluster have the same > hardware? For example, if the init node is an smp machine and the > other nodes are not, then the non-init nodes will be inheriting the > kernel image which is smp. Although running non smp code on an smp > machine may work ok, what if there are other major differences in > hardware like 64bit and 32bit architectures. > That may be a silly question to ask because ssi stands for single > system image, but I hope differences in hardware config will be ok as > I can see us running openssi on machines of today, then having to add > more machines in the future which are 64bit, 128bit (far far in the > future), etc. >=20 >=20 > ------------------------------------------------------- > This SF.Net email is sponsored by BEA Weblogic Workshop > FREE Java Enterprise J2EE developer tools! > Get your free copy of BEA WebLogic Workshop 8.1 today. > http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=3D5047&alloc_id=3D10808&op=3Dclick > _______________________________________________ > Ssic-linux-users mailing list > Ssi...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ssic-linux-users >=20 |
From: smee <sn...@gm...> - 2004-08-31 15:07:18
|
That sounds great. I'll get back to having a play with openssi. I'm sure I'll have more questions later. cheers. Cuong. On Tue, 31 Aug 2004 07:44:22 -0700, Walker, Bruce J <bru...@hp...> wrote: > OpenSSI does not require homogeneous hardware except to the extent that > all the nodes must run the same instruction set (run the same command > set - there is only one root filesystem and it has a set of command > binaries for a given instruction set). At the latest LinuxWorld > conference in San Francisco we demo'd on 3 vastly different blade nodes, > some UP and some SMP. I believe we run the SMP kernel on all (it > automatically adjusts if it is running on a UP). > > There is some chance you could run 64bit machines in a 32-bit cluster if > they could execute all the 32-bit binaries. However, we currently don't > support this. > > Bruce > > P.s. if ab > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: ssi...@li... > > [mailto:ssi...@li...] On > > Behalf Of smee > > Sent: Tuesday, August 31, 2004 7:30 AM > > To: ssi...@li... > > Subject: [SSI-users] homogenous hardware? > > > > > > I have another question (on a roll tonight). > > > > This might be a silly question, but here goes: > > Does openssi require that all nodes within a cluster have the same > > hardware? For example, if the init node is an smp machine and the > > other nodes are not, then the non-init nodes will be inheriting the > > kernel image which is smp. Although running non smp code on an smp > > machine may work ok, what if there are other major differences in > > hardware like 64bit and 32bit architectures. > > That may be a silly question to ask because ssi stands for single > > system image, but I hope differences in hardware config will be ok as > > I can see us running openssi on machines of today, then having to add > > more machines in the future which are 64bit, 128bit (far far in the > > future), etc. > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > > This SF.Net email is sponsored by BEA Weblogic Workshop > > FREE Java Enterprise J2EE developer tools! > > Get your free copy of BEA WebLogic Workshop 8.1 today. > > http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=5047&alloc_id=10808&op=click > > _______________________________________________ > > Ssic-linux-users mailing list > > Ssi...@li... > > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ssic-linux-users > > > |
From: Aneesh K. K.V <ane...@hp...> - 2004-08-31 17:00:28
|
Walker, Bruce J wrote: > > > There is some chance you could run 64bit machines in a 32-bit cluster if > they could execute all the 32-bit binaries. However, we currently don't > support this. > > How about migrating between a from a 32 bit machine to a 64 bit machine ? ( like between x86 and x86-64 ). Is it possible with the current code since the kernel code and data structures differ between these machines. With the process state information from a 32 bit kernel can a 64 bit kernel restart the process ? -aneesh |
From: John B. <joh...@hp...> - 2004-08-31 18:29:02
|
Aneesh Kumar K.V wrote: > Walker, Bruce J wrote: > >> >> >> There is some chance you could run 64bit machines in a 32-bit cluster if >> they could execute all the 32-bit binaries. However, we currently don't >> support this. >> >> > > > How about migrating between a from a 32 bit machine to a 64 bit machine > ? ( like between x86 and x86-64 ). Is it possible with the current code > since the kernel code and data structures differ between these machines. > With the process state information from a 32 bit kernel can a 64 bit > kernel restart the process ? > > -aneesh > ICS won't work properly because of data type issues between the two architectures. These could probably be fixed relatively easily. Most of the process state shouldn't be a problem, but the arch-specific state (registers and parts of the task struct) will be: I don't know how much effort would be involved. Loadleveling would have to be modified to recognize that 64-bit processes couldn't be migrated to 32-bit nodes, else the system would waste a lot of cycles trying. We'd have to modifiy CLMS to keep track of what kind of CPU each node has. The boot environment would have to change to handle the different kernels and initrds. You might have to have both 32 and 64 bit versions of the tools installed on the system. While it might be kind of fun to do, I'm not sure it would be worth it. John |