[GE users] implementation opinion / suggestions

templedf dan.templeton at sun.com
Thu Jan 28 15:42:32 GMT 2010

While RPC BDB lets you have a remote DB to share among the qmaster and 
shadows, it's also a single point of failure itself.  In general, I'd 
say pick the solution that's easiest that gives you the performance you 
need.  Classic over NFS is the easiest, but depending on your workload, 
it could be an issue.  Try it and see, though.  The major downside to 
the try-and-see approach is that you have to reinstall the qmaster to 
switch spooling methods.


On 01/27/10 11:51, jching wrote:
> Hi,
> We are currently in the process of planning for our next sge implementation and wanted to get the community's opinion on local bdb -vs- rpc bdb.  The setup will be ~2000 cores (500 nodes) with a combination of short and long jobs that will run in the queue<insert approximate # of jobs here>.
> After reviewing some of the valuable performance data provided by Mark Dixon in a previous post, it looks like there is a significant performance gain when running local bdb -vs- rpc/bdb but the rpc/bdb option gives us an additional failover option with the shadow master.  We would love to hear any opinions and/or experience people have... we also had a few questions for the large cluster (200+ nodes) community:
> 1. What is your implementation? (Local or Remote BDB w/ Shadow? Type of physical hardware?  Network?)
> 2. How many nodes?
> 3. Types of jobs? (short or long period of runtime)
> 4. Any performance issues?
> 5. Do you run DRBD?
> Thanks in advance for any valuable feedback!
> ------------------------------------------------------
> http://gridengine.sunsource.net/ds/viewMessage.do?dsForumId=38&dsMessageId=241351
> To unsubscribe from this discussion, e-mail: [users-unsubscribe at gridengine.sunsource.net].


To unsubscribe from this discussion, e-mail: [users-unsubscribe at gridengine.sunsource.net].

More information about the gridengine-users mailing list