4 ms·
you mean using a ryzen with VMs (cluster on one ryzen) I assume? bc cost of ryzan as a node would be pretty pricey compared to Pi 4s.
by bproven 7y ago
you mean using a ryzen with VMs (cluster on one ryzen) I assume? bc cost of ryzan as a node would be pretty pricey compared to Pi 4s.
- rubyn00bie 7y agoYes, a single ryzen node running multiple VMs.
- nsky-world 7y agoSo, you don't see a difference between clustering on physically separated nodes and VM?
- dahfizz 7y agoNot in this case, no. The physically separate nodes are so low power and still share significant points of failure that it doesn't matter.
- rubyn00bie 7y agoI see a difference, but it's not in favor of PIs because they're physically separated. I think it's far more realistic to choose a hypervisor (KVM, raise the roof) install it and configure it, run N virtual machines on a single machine, provisioning and slicing the hardware, setting up and managing the network between them, having disks run in a raid so the VMs don't starve for I/O and data is replicated, and then running kubernetes (or whatever personal hell you want) within your "virtual cluster." That's the whole "running a cluster" part all of these Pi Kubernetes things miss because they're running on consumer grade hardware. Your hosting provider is surely not using thousands of small under-powered machines running bare metal installs of your applications. Want to find out how resilient your cluster is? Just fucking kill one of the VMs. Boom. Instant feedback. Now try that with a PI, you'll have to unplug it, and then wait five minutes for it to boot. It becomes tedious fast. Clustering and distributed systems are extremely complex and difficult... just having physical machines doesn't really even begin to scratch that problems you'll face, just my two cents.