How Well Does Windows Cluster?

cascadefx asks: "I work for a mid-sized mid-western university. One of our departments has started up a small Beowulf cluster research project that he hopes to grow over time. At the moment, the thing is incredibly weak... but it is running on old hardware and is basically used for dog and pony shows to get more funding and hopefully donations of higher-end systems. It runs Linux and works, it is just not anything to write home about. Here's the problem: my understanding is that an MS rep asked what it would take to get them to switch to a Microsoft cluster. Is this possible? Are there MS clusters that do what Beowulf clusters are capable of? I thought MS clusters were for load balancing, not computation... which is the hoped-for goal of this project. Can the Slashdot crowd offer some advice? If there are MS clusters, comparisons of the capabilities would be welcome." One has to only go as far as Microsoft's site to see its current attempt at clustering, but what is the real story. Have any of you had a chance to pit a Linux Beowulf cluster against one from Microsoft? How did they compare?

BSOD!!

[isotope23]

What do you call a cluster of Windows machines
when they Blue Screen?????

A Cluster Bomb!!!!

Capt. Obvious.

[saintlupus]

One has to only go as far as Microsoft's site to see

Ah, so this is a typical Ask Slashdot then?

--saint

There's a name for that...

[Anonymous Coward]

Replace a Linux Cluster with Microsoft?

I believe the military have a term for this.

It's called a Cluster F**K.

New Microsoft Product!!

[isotope23]

With their vaunted stability, and marketing
savvy, their new Cluster Product will be called:

The Cluster Bomb!

department title said it all...

[Em Emalb]

"from the please...no-more-beowulf-jokes dept."

too late

Re:Licensing

[the_2nd_coming]

oh, but remember,

the TCO!!!!!!!!!!!!! :-p

you know how expencive a CS student is!!!! oh my god, how can they afford the astronomical amount of having 5 or 6 of them on one project.

don't you know that if you move to windows for all your reaseach project clustering needs, you only need a chimp....and since educating a chimp is much cheaper than educating 6 bright young men, your university will save a considerable amount of money....especialy when you lay off all those expencive profs and hire an animal trainer.

BTW: MS Slashdotted

[datastew]

Looks like Microsoft is busy being slashdotted.

Re:BSOD

[SpaceLifeForm]

Gives new meaning to the term cluster-fsck.

Don't know if this answers your question...

[Fizzlewhiff]

but based on personal experience, Windows ME is pretty much a cluster.

That's easy

[TheReverand]

Persuade one of your mates to sell them a site license for Linux. If that doesn't work, find some pro-Linux company and offer them some easy cash.

Tell them it would take a lack of common sense

[bADlOGIN]

Those linux boxen can run just fine w/o video cards, keyboards, or mice connected to them. Can the same be said of any 'Doze variant? Of course the licensing cost is the devils bargan to be wary of here. Even if they got some nice PR deal, if it's a RESEARCH operation at a university and someone might want to SHARE the fruits of the RESEARCH, it would require anyone else who wanted to verify or extend the work with the clustering software to also run 'Doze. Is M$ going to step up and offer the same deal (or better) to every other members of the research community if they want to contribute, analize, or validate and expand the work? I didn't think so.

If there's one place where Linux excells and Microsoft needs to be kept out of with armed guards, constentino wire, and rabbid dogs it's the computing research centers in higher education. Scraping by to live and make post graduate tuition can suck, but having to fight for grant money that only lines the pockets of the richest man on the planet just so you can do your thesis is adding way too much insult to injury. For the sake of future scholars, show this salesweasle the door with the help of your foot.

Inside the brain of the ms salesman

[Sabalon]

blah blah blah blah Linux cluster blah blah blah.

...Execute search MS - terms: cluster
Results: Microsoft Clustering, formally known as wolfpack.

...Execute talk: Yes...MS does clustering, what would it take to convince you to use ours.

I think if I was in the customer's position, I'd agree to it just to shove it back in their face when I ask how it distributes the computing load etc...of course that would be

blah blah blah computing load blah blah
...Execute search MS - terms: computing load
Fuzzy Logic Results: Microsoft Clustering, formally known as wolfpack. Use for load balancing.

I just think that its funny...

[acoustix]

that he says he "works for a mid-sized mid-western university" when his handle has a link to a Ball State University email address.

Just come out and say it.

Re:Take a look at

[sllort]

"Ask Slashdot" should really be called "Ask Slashdot to Ask Google".

--
You're Reading Managed Agreement [slashdot.org]

Re:Licensing

[TheCarp]

Actually... Chimps are a hell of alot more expensive.

You have to pay someone to clean the cage, and that person alone is going to get paid more than any CS student, probably more than 2 of them.

Never mind that chimps demand a much higher standard of living than students do.

-Steve

Re:Licensing

[silicon_synapse]

I can't see the sense in clustering Windows. The GUI and other parts of the system add a lot of unnecessary overhead. If MS wrote a clustering OS from the ground up, it'd be worth considering. Every job has it's tool, and IMHO Windows in it's current state is a hammer trying to remove a screw; use all the hammers you want, it won't get the screw any looser.

---
Extra! Extra! Read all about it [slashdot.org]! Slashdot editors censor dissenters [slashdot.org].

so what do you call it?

[hawk]

Would a cluster of Windows be a Grendle???

:)

hawk

Re:first post - no way

[Anonymous Coward]

Just curious, will a MS Cluster cause all of the machines to BSOD at the same time or will it be load balanced ;)

Can you imagine...

[TeknoHog]

this article without the obligatory Beowulf comments?

Re:BTW: MS Slashdotted

[Cinnibar CP]

This wouldn't have happened if they had thier servers clustered to handle the load-balancing issues.

Re:Point?

[T3kno]

Yeah, but if you listen to what Microsoft claims you should be able to do all of the nuclear simulations you need in thirty days, not to mention find the elusive extraterestrials, break RC5-64, and you can still play solitaire on your server. I do wonder if a cluster will make the 3D-Maze run faster?

What it would take

[Arandir]

my understanding is that an MS rep asked what it would take to get them to switch to a Microsoft cluster.

You've got a golden opportunity here! Microsoft does it your way or they don't get the sale.

Let them know the nature of a cluster in a research project. Nodes will be swapped in and out. New ones will be added. Different OSs will be used. So tell them you want a copy of Windows for each potential node, licensed to the University and not to any individual node. Tell them you need full rights to install, reinstall, and uninstall any particular copy on any particular node. Tell them you will not accept any terms restricting the cluster to Windows only.

If you really want to play hardball, tell them you don't even want licenses, but bonafide user-owned copies of Windows subject only to the provisions of copyright. In other words, you don't want to be subject to any EULA. Then you'll discover how much Microsoft wants your cluster to be a Windows cluster.

I've clustered Windows boxes plenty of times

[FeltTip]

I've clustered Windows boxes plenty of times. I leave them clustered in a corner of a dark closet. Unplugged.

Nope

[SpaceBadger]

A cluster of Windows would be a Glass House, and you know what they say about those.

Re:Licensing

[lynx_user_abroad]

You have to pay someone to clean the cage...

What the chimps leave on the floor will be nothing compared to what the Windows-based cluster will leave on the floor.

Re:so what do you call it?

[west]

Oddly enough, I've usually heard a Window's cluster referred to as a "pane".

Didn't make sense to me, but the sys admins certainly were adamant :-).

Re:so what do you call it?

[rnturn]

``I've usually heard a Window's cluster referred to as a "pane".''

Except for the spelling error, that'd just about sum it up, eh?

Microsoft says... "little substantive difference"

[doorbot.com]

(From http://www.microsoft.com/windows2000/hpc/faq.asp [microsoft.com])

I tried to read between the lines so we can get the "real" picture... my comments are in italics, and delimited with brackets.

Q. How does a Windows-based supercluster compare with one running UNIX or Linux?

A. In short, there's very little substantive difference [ except you have to pay for our software, and it's not cheap ], but owners of existing UNIX-based solutions will face changes that will cause them some work and discomfort (less for users than for their current administrators and support staff) [ because when the server blue screens in the middle of the night who gets called? ]. These are offset in part by lower costs of ownership (technical skills required) [ because incompetent Windows admins are a dime a dozen ], breadth of applications and support tools [ expenses ], vendor support options [ additional expenses ], and commonality with the constantly improving desktop environment [ which is completely useless for a (headless) server ].

From a hardware perspective, there's very little difference seen by the application. In the past, UNIX-based hardware environments had better floating-point performance [ and still does ], but that's been offset in the last few years by Moore's Law curves for large-volume products that have advanced faster than specialty products have [ now you can throw more hardware at the problem for the same price ], as well as the price and support cost differentials between these vendors' products.

From a software perspective, Windows is a markedly different environment [ hopefully if you agree with this statement you will agree (and believe) our other statements ], designed with priorities set by a much different market segment than traditional science and engineering [ we're trying to shoehorn our product into a market it doesn't belong ]. Windows NT® and now Windows 2000 were designed to meet the needs of those ISVs building products for businesses that are unable or unwilling to dedicate their best people [ incompetent employees/amoebas ] to support their infrastructure (versus focusing on building solutions for their business mission) [ because supporting infrastructure should not be that hard ], as well as the needs of a hardware community that required continuous integration of new devices and components [ such as digital camera support for your database server ].

[ we hope that you've become completely confused by this, please telephone your local Microsoft sales office and we will "explain" things to you... please have your credit card ready ]

Re:Licensing

[Thing 1]

I installed debian GNU/linux on this box 2.5 years ago, have installed software and iuninstalled it over and over... and it never gets unstable.

I think you have to specifically install the "unstable" portion of Debian -- unlike Windows, it won't do that automatically.

Windows Clusster...

[Anonymous Coward]

"Windows Cluster"...seems like there's a word missing...