5 ms·
Sounds a bit like a Beowulf Linux cluster from about 20y ago. What's the major difference between the approach of those.
by eliaspro 6y ago
Sounds a bit like a Beowulf Linux cluster from about 20y ago. What's the major difference between the approach of those.
- detaro 6y agoBeowulf was just the idea of making a cluster of cheap commodity hardware using open software, typically not Single System Image.
- nineteen999 6y agoYeah I was thinking this sounds more like MOSIX, but with the added abstraction to handle executing the same code accross different architectures. http://www.mosix.cs.huji.ac.il/txt_about.html http://www.mosix.cs.huji.ac.il/txt_about.html
- natmaka 6y agoIndeed, MOSIX or Kerrighed http://www.kerrighed.org/wiki/index.php/Main_Page http://www.kerrighed.org/wiki/index.php/Main_Page
- willtim 6y agoBeowulf had no shared memory abstraction, programs had to be written using message passing, e.g. MPI. I'm not convinced a shared memory abstraction is a good thing for distribution across machines. Some Beowulf clusters actually had much lower latency interconnects than ethernet, e.g. Quadrics, but we still needed to carefully optimise the traffic. With a shared memory abstraction, such optimisation is out of our hands.
- pbhjpbhj 6y ago1. Natalie Portman 2. Hot grits 3. ... 4. Profit! Maybe?