2 ms·

This, it baffles me to no end that people insist on using Raspberry Pis, which are almost comically slow and not really that energy efficient, to run things lik

by bri3d 5y ago

This, it baffles me to no end that people insist on using Raspberry Pis, which are almost comically slow and not really that energy efficient, to run things like K8s scheduled containers, sometimes even buying $200 backplane boards to do so, which also defeats almost any sort of price advantage. There has to be something about the Pi that drives this, but I can't figure out what it is. Yes, Raspbian is easy to get start with, but no easier or harder than booting a VM locally or on the cloud with an image. Yes, Pis are small, quiet, and low power, but so are NUCs. Sure they're cheap, but once you buy 4 Pis and some fancy backplane manager, you could have easily gotten a NUC or a used PC instead. Please just buy a real computer! Pis are exceptionally good for a lot of real use cases where the form factor, GPIO capabilities, or pre-approved module certifications are essential. Not being able to get them because of "cluster" use is annoying.

Ao7bei3s 5y ago
What you're missing is that it's not about compute, it's about fun. Pi's are fun, because Pi cluster's have _real_ hardware redundancy and real risk of hardware faults. Clusters of VM's are boring (what's the point of having a cluster then?), and NUCs are too expensive to buy three or five of. Clusters of real servers are even more expensive, and living room incompatible. Energy efficiency does not matter: First, a Pi costs $5 per year in electricity. For the price of one NUC, you can buy the entire Pi cluster _and_ run it for years. Second, this is home use, not enterprise use. Don't assume the nodes are actually constantly utilized. The numbers are a lot less unfavorable for the Pi when you look at realistic workloads, by which I mean idle (~4W/Pi vs ~11W/NUC). I object to calling it "running clusters for no reason". Hands-on experience, fun and motivation are perfectly valid reasons. And this is extremely cheap as far as specialized hardware goes. Please compare with professional training approaches (run 19" servers in lab, or rent EC2 instances), other hobbies (e.g. horseback riding), or professions (e.g. aviation).
- bri3d 5y ago
  That's fair, I am being too dismissive of people who find running clusters an amusing activity in and of itself for whatever reason. As a means to an end a Pi is a pretty bad tool, but as a means for a means, I see the appeal.

by bri3d 5y ago

Ao7bei3s 5y ago

What you're missing is that it's not about compute, it's about fun. Pi's are fun, because Pi cluster's have _real_ hardware redundancy and real risk of hardware faults. Clusters of VM's are boring (what's the point of having a cluster then?), and NUCs are too expensive to buy three or five of. Clusters of real servers are even more expensive, and living room incompatible. Energy efficiency does not matter: First, a Pi costs $5 per year in electricity. For the price of one NUC, you can buy the entire Pi cluster _and_ run it for years. Second, this is home use, not enterprise use. Don't assume the nodes are actually constantly utilized. The numbers are a lot less unfavorable for the Pi when you look at realistic workloads, by which I mean idle (~4W/Pi vs ~11W/NUC). I object to calling it "running clusters for no reason". Hands-on experience, fun and motivation are perfectly valid reasons. And this is extremely cheap as far as specialized hardware goes. Please compare with professional training approaches (run 19" servers in lab, or rent EC2 instances), other hobbies (e.g. horseback riding), or professions (e.g. aviation).

bri3d 5y ago
That's fair, I am being too dismissive of people who find running clusters an amusing activity in and of itself for whatever reason. As a means to an end a Pi is a pretty bad tool, but as a means for a means, I see the appeal.