[Xen-users] Re: [Rocks-Discuss] Rocks or Virtual Cluster?

["lists@xxxxxxxxxxxx" <lists@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Oh wait now, I think I misunderstood this. So, rocks really is not something 
used for say a redundant xen cluster for example. The way the article reads, I 
thought it was saying that rocks was a bit of both worlds, HPC, SSI type 
applications AND a distributed cluster is how I understood this. Now I think 
I'm seeing that rocks isn't at all what I was thinking or what the article 
eludes to for newbies.

Darn! A clustered, redundant xen environment, it sounded too good to be true. 
Then again, I'm sure there are other tools out there that do what I'm after.

Mike



On Mon, 19 Jan 2009 11:56:06 -0800, Bart Brashers wrote:
>ï
>ï
>ïRocks is really all about high performance computing (doing math) and not
>ïredundancy. ïThere is no support for building redundant frontends, for
>ïexample. ïRocks can create multiple virtual compute nodes inside a physical
>ïcompute node, but I don't know if Xen can move them from node to node. ïI
>ïsuspect not. ïThe virtual compute nodes that it creates are also tailored
>ïto HPC, by default.
>ï
>ïYou might be better served just using Xen without Rocks. ïSince you most
>ïlikely would have to create a highly customized virtual machine environment
>ïto suite your needs, you won't really be taking advantage of the Rocks
>ïaspect of things.
>ï
>ïMy $0.02.
>ï
>ïBart
>ï
>>ïNo one has read the article??? :)
>>ïMust be someone on here who can give me a little input on this. Trying to
>>ïfind out if the article is
>>ïtalking about creating a virtual environment inside of a cluster or using
>>ïmultiple machines to create
>>ïa rocks cluster.
>>ï
>>ïMike
>>ï
>>ï
>>ïOn Thu, 15 Jan 2009 12:06:32 -0600, lists@xxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
>>>ïÂHi folks,
>>>ï
>>>ïÂLooking at rocks as a possible solution for better redundant services.
>>>ïÂWhile my redhat GFS cluster has been useful, it is not as useful as
>>>ïwhat
>>>ïÂrocks appears to potentially be. From what I'm reading, it sounds like
>>>ïÂrocks would give me a great deal more usability. The Linux magazine
>>>ïarticle
>>>ïÂI read seems to say that I can build a redundant cluster of VMware/Xen
>>>ïÂbackends and even at the same time, get the benefits of an SSI
>>>ïcluster? Is
>>>ïÂthis true?
>>>ï
>>>ïÂBased on the article, I seek a little additional information so that
>>>ïI can
>>>ïÂget started on my first rocks cluster. Sorry if I don't have the
>>>ïÂterminology correct just yet.
>>>ï
>>>ïÂIn my application, I would like to use rocks as a physical cluster
>>>ïthat
>>>ïÂwould allow me to have redundant VMware and Xen servers.
>>>ï
>>>ïÂSo for example:
>>>ïÂ-head node/controller
>>>ïÂ-server node 1 - redundant
>>>ïÂ-server node 2 - redundant
>>>ïÂ-server node 3 - redundant
>>>ï
>>>ïÂThe back end servers would run redundant VMware/Xen servers. The
>>>ïguests
>>>ïÂwould be LAMP servers along with other network resources.
>>>ïÂI also use a mix of fibre channel and Ethernet storage systems. Some
>>>ïis
>>>ïÂconnected directly to servers, some connected to filer heads which
>>>ïexport
>>>ïÂCIFS, NFS, etc.
>>>ï
>>>ïÂI have plenty of physical boxes to start working on take.
>>>ïÂMy very first question, based on the short article I read is as
>>>ïfollows.
>>>ï
>>>ïÂI am assuming the head node requires less powerful resources because
>>>ïit is
>>>ïÂnot going to host any guests, since it is only the controller. But,
>>>ïwhile
>>>ïÂthe article mentions CPU/RAM, it's not very clear on what the real
>>>ïÂrequirements might be. Should I use a very powerful server for the
>>>ïÂcontroller node or am I wasting resources? I'm guessing it is mostly
>>>ïjust
>>>ïÂredirecting traffic so if anything, might need good I/O speeds? If the
>>>ïÂtraffic doesn't flow through the controller, then I could see that it
>>>ïmight
>>>ïÂnot need that much speed, just good availability, accessibility.
>>>ï
>>>ïÂFinally, one of the problems I am having is that VMware Server
>>>ïdoesn't seem
>>>ïÂto have redundant capabilities and this is what I badly need. I'm
>>>ïusing
>>>ïÂVMware Server 2.0 for win servers so the problem is that if a machine
>>>ïneeds
>>>ïÂto go down or what ever, I have to shut down the guests, move them to
>>>ïÂanother server, fire them back up, it's simply not efficient. I think
>>>ïXen
>>>ïÂallows for redundancy of Linux guests, but I'm not sure about win
>>>ïmachines.
>>>ïÂThe article seems to suggest that using rocks, I can get redundancy
>>>ïfor
>>>ïÂeither.
>>>ï
>>>ïÂThanks for any help you can provide!
>>>ï
>>>ïÂMike
>ï
>ï
>ïThis message contains information that may be confidential, privileged or
>ïotherwise protected by law from disclosure. It is intended for the
>ïexclusive use of the Addressee(s). Unless you are the addressee or
>ïauthorized agent of the addressee, you may not review, copy, distribute or
>ïdisclose to anyone the message or any information contained within. If you
>ïhave received this message in error, please contact the sender by
>ïelectronic reply to email@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx and immediately delete all copies
>ïof the message.



_______________________________________________
Xen-users mailing list
Xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-users