![]() |
|
|
#1 |
|
25×3×53 Posts |
If any one could figure out a way to design a software that could run on a server to over 100 computers simultaneously, I think I could run up to 100 suspect numbers per month. Please Respond.
|
|
|
|
#2 |
|
3·1,163 Posts |
Why do you want to do that?
Thats one BIG system dontcha know |
|
|
|
#3 |
|
2·4,787 Posts |
Why do you want to do that?
Thats one BIG system dontcha know |
|
|
|
#4 | |
|
Nov 2003
22×5×373 Posts |
Quote:
Look up Grid Computing. I built such a system back in '85. Today, there are a number of companies providing this capability. Look up 'Axceleon' |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#5 |
|
Mar 2005
Poland
5×7 Posts |
Aloso google for such terms as:
"Beowulf" "Cluster of Workstations" "OpenMP" "MPICH" - this one works for Windows NT! "LAM" BTW: Is someone here that can REALLY re-code a program to use MPI or similar environment? |
|
|
|
|
|
#6 |
|
24×193 Posts |
ltsp.org
also ask prime monster for help he runs the prime monsters aka diskless these are very easy to manage after set up. |
|
|
|
#7 | |
|
∂2ω=0
Sep 2002
República de California
103×113 Posts |
Quote:
If you've got a 100-CPU system burning a hole in your pocket and you want it to use it to do GIMPS work, no problem - just run an instance of whatever program is best for your CPU type on each CPU. That will maximize your system's contribution to the project. If what you seek is instead the macho thrill of "I can do an LL test faster than the next guy by blasting it with N >> 1 processors," well, then you're not interested in the science anyway. And in that case a bottle of Viagra and a fast car will probably cost you less than a 100-CPU cluster. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#8 | |
|
Mar 2005
Poland
5·7 Posts |
Quote:
But my question was even more general - if there is someone on this forum who can re-program any not very complicated source code to use effectively such environments as OpenMP or MPI... Washuu |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#9 | |
|
Jun 2003
The Texas Hill Country
32×112 Posts |
Quote:
If the many processors can share a common memory, the results can be amazingly better than those of a single processor. If, on the other hand, you must rely on some network to connect the processors, it is probably going to be the network, rather than the processors, that becomes the limiting factor. As an example. on a 32 processor (16x2) cluster of 1GHz processors,interconnected with Gigabit Ethernet and an expensive switch, Paul was actually able to run a siever "in the background" on each of the 16 boxes without affecting the rate at which the block Lanzcos matrix solution proceeded. Each node had "more than enough" real memory and processing speed to completely clog the network. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#10 | |
|
∂2ω=0
Sep 2002
República de California
2D7716 Posts |
Quote:
"I think I could run up to 100 suspect numbers per month." ...which refers specifically to GIMPS work. So he (or she), not you, wins the Viagra and sportscar.
Last fiddled with by ewmayer on 2005-06-01 at 23:47 |
|
|
|
|
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| New GPU Compute System | airsquirrels | GPU Computing | 90 | 2017-12-08 00:13 |
| How smoked is my system? | NBtarheel_33 | Hardware | 13 | 2012-10-16 11:38 |
| System Recommendation | drh | Hardware | 21 | 2011-05-21 01:39 |
| Advice for NFS LA system | Jeff Gilchrist | Hardware | 5 | 2010-01-30 13:27 |
| Computer algebra system that handles error terms? | CRGreathouse | Math | 0 | 2009-05-26 18:50 |