4 ms·

ARM based Cloud Cluster Running Google App Engine

32 points by cnxsoft 15y ago

almost 15y ago
Looks very cool. But what is a "cloud cluster"? It's evidently not a cluster in the cloud as it's a bit of physical hardware they are using. I guess it could be a cluster that could be used as part of a cloud, but then isn't that the same as saying it's a "cluster"?
- rbanffy 15y ago
  It's could-ish because it's running TyphoonAE, which in turn runs applications that can scale dynamically according to load without much consideration as to where in the cluster they run. It's a cloud, just a very tiny one you can power from one power outlet.
av500 15y ago
"...Norisuna had a comparison table that showed the Pandaboard cloud (OMAP4 @ 1GHz – 12 Cores) uses 4x times space and 5x less power (50W vs. 257 W) than a Xeon 1.8GHz Quad Core server with about the same amount of processing power and memory (6GB vs. 8GB)...." any data to back up that claim? Is that just raw MHz or real benchmarks?
- nl 15y ago
  I suspect that they are counting the processing power of the Pandaboard GPU (most of these types of comparisons do). It's not really a very useful comparison - most general purpose server software doesn't make much use of the GPU.
ippisl 15y ago
Using a comment from the site one can calculate that the cluster gets a coremark score of 34K vs the xeon's 23K(leaving aside the SD card issue). comment: """ I went to Coremark website and compared the Coremark 1.0 scores of OMAP4430 running 2 forks and Intel Xeon E5405 (Quad Core @ 2 GHz) running 4 threads. OMAP 4 gets 5742.20 and Xeon E5405 gets 23579. (See screenshot below) http://www.cnx-software.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/benchmark_coremark_1.0_xeon_e5405_vs_TI_OMAP4430SDP.jpg http://www.cnx-software.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/bench... But I still think the Xeon server would probably perform (much) better than the pandaboard cluster during “real” tests because of the storage used in the pandaboards (SD Card or external USB storage). """
cturner 15y ago
I'm working to build a cluster of pandaboards. This week I've taken delivery of a powersupply that will power several boards from a single wall-socket. Something I've been stuck on - how to create mess-free casing. The least-bad idea I've had so far is to make a four-leg rack, strap the boards and cables to chipboard, lay them in the rack, and then fold an asian-style room partition around it. This won't keep out dust and spiders though. Any advice?

32 points by cnxsoft 15y ago

Looks very cool. But what is a "cloud cluster"? It's evidently not a cluster in the cloud as it's a bit of physical hardware they are using. I guess it could be a cluster that could be used as part of a cloud, but then isn't that the same as saying it's a "cluster"?

rbanffy 15y ago
It's could-ish because it's running TyphoonAE, which in turn runs applications that can scale dynamically according to load without much consideration as to where in the cluster they run. It's a cloud, just a very tiny one you can power from one power outlet.

av500 15y ago

"...Norisuna had a comparison table that showed the Pandaboard cloud (OMAP4 @ 1GHz – 12 Cores) uses 4x times space and 5x less power (50W vs. 257 W) than a Xeon 1.8GHz Quad Core server with about the same amount of processing power and memory (6GB vs. 8GB)...." any data to back up that claim? Is that just raw MHz or real benchmarks?

nl 15y ago
I suspect that they are counting the processing power of the Pandaboard GPU (most of these types of comparisons do). It's not really a very useful comparison - most general purpose server software doesn't make much use of the GPU.

ippisl 15y ago

Using a comment from the site one can calculate that the cluster gets a coremark score of 34K vs the xeon's 23K(leaving aside the SD card issue). comment: """ I went to Coremark website and compared the Coremark 1.0 scores of OMAP4430 running 2 forks and Intel Xeon E5405 (Quad Core @ 2 GHz) running 4 threads. OMAP 4 gets 5742.20 and Xeon E5405 gets 23579. (See screenshot below) http://www.cnx-software.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/benchmark_coremark_1.0_xeon_e5405_vs_TI_OMAP4430SDP.jpg http://www.cnx-software.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/bench... But I still think the Xeon server would probably perform (much) better than the pandaboard cluster during “real” tests because of the storage used in the pandaboards (SD Card or external USB storage). """

cturner 15y ago

I'm working to build a cluster of pandaboards. This week I've taken delivery of a powersupply that will power several boards from a single wall-socket. Something I've been stuck on - how to create mess-free casing. The least-bad idea I've had so far is to make a four-leg rack, strap the boards and cables to chipboard, lay them in the rack, and then fold an asian-style room partition around it. This won't keep out dust and spiders though. Any advice?