Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

"Evolution of the Internet" Powers Massive LHC Grid

Soulskill posted more than 6 years ago | from the throttle-this dept.

Networking 93

jbrodkin brings us a story about the development of the computer network supporting CERN's Large Hadron Collider, which will begin smashing particles into one another later this year. We've discussed some of the impressive capabilities of this network in the past. "Data will be gathered from the European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN), which hosts the collider in France and Switzerland, and distributed to thousands of scientists throughout the world. One writer described the grid as a 'parallel Internet.' Ruth Pordes, executive director of the Open Science Grid, which oversees the US infrastructure for the LHC network, describes it as an 'evolution of the Internet.' New fiber-optic cables with special protocols will be used to move data from CERN to 11 Tier-1 sites around the globe, which in turn use standard Internet technologies to transfer the data to more than 150 Tier-2 centers. Worldwide, the LHC computing grid will be comprised of about 20,000 servers, primarily running the Linux operating system. Scientists at Tier-2 sites can access these servers remotely when running complex experiments based on LHC data, Pordes says. If scientists need a million CPU hours to run an experiment overnight, the distributed nature of the grid allows them to access that computing power from any part of the worldwide network"

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

I'm impressed (1)

MassiveForces (991813) | more than 6 years ago | (#23173598)

I mean, if even the supporting computer network is smashing particles into each other it's got to be 133+!

Re:I'm impressed (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23173910)

Yah dude, you know these "scientists" are gonna frag it up with their super-low fiber optic distributed ping. I bet they hack too.

Re:I'm impressed (0, Offtopic)

m.ducharme (1082683) | more than 6 years ago | (#23174344)

OMGHAX!

Need more specs (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23173604)

How many Skynet jokes can it generate on demand?

Re:Need more specs (1)

Besna (1175279) | more than 6 years ago | (#23173802)

Speaking of bots--this has to be one. The facetious bot?

Waste of good fiber. (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23173616)

Q: You know what Google does when they need to shift large amounts of data?

A: They courier it. [google.com]

Re:Waste of good fiber. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23173674)

Dickwad. Mod parent down

Re:Waste of good fiber. (2, Informative)

Yvan256 (722131) | more than 6 years ago | (#23173714)

warning: this is a "*.notlong.com" link... DO NOT CLICK.

Re:Waste of good fiber. (4, Insightful)

TubeSteak (669689) | more than 6 years ago | (#23173842)

You'd think our /. Overlords would gin up a filter to block the posting of google & yahoo redirects.

There's really no reason to use redirects or tinyurl on /.

Re:Waste of good fiber. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23174202)

I clicked, what happens to me?

Re:Waste of good fiber. (1)

justthinkit (954982) | more than 5 years ago | (#23175394)

Well, there is a .SIG size limit --> TinyURL gets around this. Wait a tick, that is my situation exactly -- my TinyURL below links to a slashdot post I made in the past. Couldn't fit it all in without TinyURL.

.SIG size could be increased, with a user-defined setting that determines how big a .SIG each individual wants to see [sice /. only stores one copy per user (not per post) in any case this can't impact /. if the limit is moved to say 500 bytes]. Then the need for TinyURL is removed and such redirects could be filtered. Of course, one could still set up a meta-redirect page on a web site that sent the user to who knows what ultimate destination.

Re:Waste of good fiber. (1)

complete loony (663508) | more than 6 years ago | (#23178008)

Perhaps, if they had separate limits for visible and invisible characters.

Re:Waste of good fiber. (1)

gad_zuki! (70830) | more than 5 years ago | (#23176430)

Sig size mostly. Of course thst can be lifted. They can just ignore the URL size, to a certain degree of course.

Re:Waste of good fiber. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#23175046)

What happens if you did click?

CERN '08 (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23173656)

I'd like to be able to vote for CERN in the upcoming US election.

Re:CERN '08 (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23173764)

Sad thing is, CERN would probably win.

Security? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23173664)

Hmmm... Just wait till this gets turned into a botnet... Oh, wait, it runs Linux. I guess we're safe.

Re:Security? (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23173912)

there is a lot of quite fancy security stuff used. all users need a x.509 certificate to submit jobs.

LHC Hype (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23173748)

The LHC has generated so much hype that it is now more hyped than Star Wars Episode I. Leading entertainment columnists fear it may create so much mass (hysteria) that it will implode into a singularity, a black hole (like Britney Spears).

One thing's for sure, you can expect nothing to happen until one LHC worker stabs another and a friend intervenes to slice the murderer in half and send him down into the collider [youtube.com] !

Bitch... (2, Insightful)

HetMes (1074585) | more than 6 years ago | (#23173804)

I suppose this will all be raw sensor data from the LHC itself, right? Must be a bitch to get anything meaningfull out of it.

Re:Bitch... (1)

mongre26 (999481) | more than 6 years ago | (#23174068)

In a word, yes. The data is filtered and processed at multiple stages, that is part of why the system is setup in a tiered architecture. The actual data that turns into a visual result (graph) is fairly small after all the stages are complete. It is like mining for diamonds where you discard almost everything you pull from the ground and keep only the smallest portion. After all, if the problem was easy there would be no need for all of this computing to be thrown at it.

Re:Bitch... (1)

imsabbel (611519) | more than 6 years ago | (#23174170)

Well, not if i remember correctly.
They save all the sensor data to events that make the first relevancy triggers, but the vast majority is discarted.

Re:Bitch... (3, Funny)

megaditto (982598) | more than 6 years ago | (#23174348)

If you scientists are so smart, how come you can't spell Hadron? [google.com]

Re:Bitch... (1)

imsabbel (611519) | more than 5 years ago | (#23175892)

Hah. Thats seriously funny.

Shame on the editors, thought.

outsource (1)

tinasilvee (1279196) | more than 6 years ago | (#23195504)

Outsourcing has so many benefits: 1) Cost Savings 2) Time Zone Benefits 3) Quick Turn Around Time 4) Standardizing Business Processes and many more.... http://www.outsourcewebsite.com/ [outsourcewebsite.com]

Re:Bitch... (1)

imsabbel (611519) | more than 6 years ago | (#23174138)

Nah.
This is already behind the "realtime" stage, which is made done directly in hardware and only picks up the 0.001%or so of events that are deemed worthwhile to analyse.
Otherwise, they would need exabit connections...

Some Realtime (4, Interesting)

Roger W Moore (538166) | more than 6 years ago | (#23174254)

Actually not all of it is offline. One of the things I have a research grant for is to develop a realtime remote farm for monitoring the detector. This is to catch subtle detector problems quickly before we end up collecting 2 weeks of useless data.

For the Tier 1 a significant fraction of the data is raw 'sensor' (we call it detector) data. This allows reconstruction program converts the data into physics objects like electrons, muons, jets etc.) to be rerun on the data once bugs in the initial reconstruction program have been fixed.

And this, ladies and gentlemen... (1)

MegaMahr (788652) | more than 6 years ago | (#23173818)

Is the birth of Skynet, and will be the death of us all. (and scratch the ladies in the subject; forgot for a second what site this was...)

Evolution of the Internet? (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23173824)

Don't you know God created the Internet through Intelligent design?

Re:Evolution of the Internet? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23174670)

I know you're trying to be funny by mocking Intelligent Design, but why not Intelligent Design? Afterall, there is proof of Unintelligent Design [microsoft.com] !

PIG AMERICA IS A TWO TRIP CASTLE OFF SHAME (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23173846)

box of empty, stupid punch-man

All that and we still have no anti-gravity (-1, Flamebait)

tjstork (137384) | more than 6 years ago | (#23173882)

You know, we're going through all this, and we're still not anywhere near closer to coming up with a machine that does anti-gravity, alter the strong force or increase the weak. We can utilize electromagnetism better than the other forces, but as a rule, the ability to control one of the most fundamental forces of nature utterly eludes us. Basically, physics is a total failure, and that's why there's no flying cars or nuclear fusion...

Re:All that and we still have no anti-gravity (4, Funny)

Jugalator (259273) | more than 6 years ago | (#23173944)

You know, we're going through all this, and we're still not anywhere near closer to coming up with a machine that does anti-gravity, alter the strong force or increase the weak.
So go invent your own universe where the laws of physics are cheaper to alter. ;)

Re:All that and we still have no anti-gravity (1)

HolyCrapSCOsux (700114) | more than 5 years ago | (#23175296)

You can't increase the weak. It would then be strong!
Then the less strong will be the new weak. Then you will want THAT increased!

When will you be happy?

Re:All that and we still have no anti-gravity (2, Interesting)

evanbd (210358) | more than 6 years ago | (#23174220)

So, what have you done today to help make science fiction closer to reality?

I worked on the board layout for my rocket test stand data acquisition system. Sure, it's far removed from a trip to Mars, but you have to start somewhere. I'll bet you can't even say that much.

If you're unwilling to put forth any effort, quit bitching at those who are.

Re:All that and we still have no anti-gravity (2, Interesting)

tjstork (137384) | more than 6 years ago | (#23174360)

So, what have you done today to help make science fiction closer to reality?

I work in my spare time on an open source project called factdiv. The idea is to use FACTOR as a problem to learn how to attack complexity itself. Complexity problems underly all the great open questions in science and so if you can solve those, you sorta solve them all.

So far, results haven't been all that great, but, someone will get there. If we do, then we can have computers answer questions, like, how to take 10,000,000 parts and build a spaceship, how to take a model of science and devise experiments to probe its limits, and have it wired up automatically to manufacturing apparatus so that it can pretty much do unattended science 24x7, and then file away the knowledge that will last far more long than a mere human brain can live.

But, I still can only FACTOR about 20 digits numbers and have no good complexity answers, but as you said, you have to start somewhere.

Re:All that and we still have no anti-gravity (1)

evanbd (210358) | more than 6 years ago | (#23174462)

Fair enough, you have to start somewhere. But given your own results, what makes you think the physicists aren't making progress at a reasonable pace?

Re:All that and we still have no anti-gravity (1)

tjstork (137384) | more than 5 years ago | (#23177046)

Fair enough, you have to start somewhere. But given your own results, what makes you think the physicists aren't making progress at a reasonable pace?

The whole post was a joke, and nobody got it.

Re:All that and we still have no anti-gravity (1)

HolyCrapSCOsux (700114) | more than 5 years ago | (#23175322)

But, once you get GLaDOS built, don't forget to disable the neurotoxin enitters.

Re:All that and we still have no anti-gravity (1)

tjstork (137384) | more than 6 years ago | (#23181270)

But, once you get GLaDOS built, don't forget to disable the neurotoxin enitters.

That's going to be difficult because of all the complications with the folding nacelles and power couplings...

How do you know this? (5, Insightful)

Roger W Moore (538166) | more than 6 years ago | (#23174376)

You know, we're going through all this, and we're still not anywhere near closer to coming up with a machine that does anti-gravity

How do you know this? One possibility is that there are more that 3 space dimensions. If this is the case AND the LHC has enough energy to access them we could well end up being able to study quantum gravity at the LHC. This might not give is flying cars but in order to first utilize something it is neccessary to understand it.

Basically, physics is a total failure, and that's why there's no flying cars or nuclear fusion...

It depends on what you think the goals of physics are. As a physicist myself I would define them as "to understand how the Universe works". While we still have a long way to go physics has by no means been a failure in that regard. We understand far more about how the Universe works than we did 50 or 100 years ago. Whether or not we can produce flying cars or fusion reactors depends on HOW the Universe works. To say that physics is a failure because these things are extremely hard to produce would be like saying that Columbus' expedition was a total failure because he didn't get to India. You cannot complain physics is a failure just because the Universe does not work the way that YOU want it to - we study the laws of physics, we don't get to make them.....although it would be interesting if we could!

Re:How do you know this? (3, Funny)

Relic of the Future (118669) | more than 5 years ago | (#23175444)

Indeed. The lack of flying cars isn't a failure of scientist; it's a failure of engineers. Stop slacking, engineers!

(Yes, I'm an engineer. And, I admit, I'm slacking.)

Re:How do you know this? (1)

GooberToo (74388) | more than 5 years ago | (#23176752)

Indeed. The lack of flying cars isn't a failure of scientist; it's a failure of engineers. Stop slacking, engineers!

(Yes, I'm an engineer. And, I admit, I'm slacking.)

Sorry, but you are wrong. The lack of flying cars is the failure of lawyers.

Re:How do you know this? (1)

Roger W Moore (538166) | more than 6 years ago | (#23234576)

Sorry, but you are wrong. The lack of flying cars is the failure of lawyers.

Unfortunately suing car manufacturers for failure to produce a flying car is not an attempt that is likely to succeed.

Re:How do you know this? (1)

GooberToo (74388) | more than 6 years ago | (#23238430)

Hehehe. Cute.

Lawyers have made the concept of a flying car all but impossible because of liability concerns. As is, they are the cause of aviation costing *double* what it should.

Re:All that and we still have no anti-gravity (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#23176748)

Basically, physics is a total failure and that's why there's no flying cars or nuclear fusion
No, YOU are a total failure, for not giving the world flying cars and nuclear fusion.

WTF is wrong with your stupid ass.. get out there and get to work.. we are waiting!

The question is... (4, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23173898)

...did it have a "Vista capable" sticker?

Re:The question is... (1)

nawcom (941663) | more than 5 years ago | (#23175146)

Nope, unfortunately the servers don't come with dedicated video cards. So no Aero.
Or wait.. that just means it's not "Vista Premium" capable...
*dreams of the profits of selling 20K vista licenses would bring in*
..muahahaha...hahahah......HAHAHAHAHAHAHA*snort*HAHAHAHAHAAHAAA!

They should be expecting a letter any day now... (1)

the saltydog (450856) | more than 6 years ago | (#23173906)

...from SCO Germany, trying to get them to buy 20,000 SCOSource licenses.
This is exactly the sort of asshattery I would expect from an organization headed by Ralph Yarro and Darl McBride.

Lucky they're not using Windows Server (1)

Finallyjoined!!! (1158431) | more than 6 years ago | (#23173974)

It would be the end of the world as we know it.....

15 Petabytes (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23173940)

"The LHC collisions will produce 10 to 15 petabytes of data a year"

The collisions will produce much more data, but "only" 15 PB of that will be permanently stored. That's a stack of CDs 20km high. Every. Year.

Re:15 Petabytes (1)

Fyrecrypts (1009981) | more than 5 years ago | (#23176844)

The hell? I thought we were using Libraries of Congresses now, not the height of a stack of CDs. Damn buzzword measurements.

Re:15 Petabytes (1)

iNaya (1049686) | more than 6 years ago | (#23179384)

OK, let's put it into Libraries of Congresses.

The James Madison building alone has about 424k m^3 of assignable space (assuming a height of 10 feet of assignable space). The stack of CD's takes up 288 m3 assuming 12x12cm packaging. So assuming that the other two library buildings burnt down, then that would be 1/2000 libraries of congress.

Bah.

Re:15 Petabytes (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23179158)

While we are on the subject of stupid examples just imagine how high a stack of floppy disks that is...

Re:15 Petabytes (1)

Nullav (1053766) | more than 6 years ago | (#23180448)

imagine how high a stack of floppy disks that is...
In space elevators?

"fiber-optic cables with special protocols" (1)

TubeSteak (669689) | more than 6 years ago | (#23173950)

New fiber-optic cables with special protocols will be used to move data from CERN to 11 Tier-1 sites around the globe
Are they talking about Internet2 or Tier-1 ISPs?

Re:"fiber-optic cables with special protocols" (3, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23174052)

I2 is a US organization. The owner of the transatlantic cables is called the "LHC OPN" (Optical Private Network), I think. The full build-out will be about 80Gbps.

I suspect the "special protocols" they are referring to are about the data transfer protocols (GridFTP for data movement), not some wonky Layer-1 protocol. However, these folks, like I2, have been investing in dynamic-circuit equipment, meaning that sites could eventually get dedicated bandwidth between any two installations.

Re:"fiber-optic cables with special protocols" (2, Informative)

vondo (303621) | more than 6 years ago | (#23174530)

It has nothing to do with ISPs. The Tier1 sites are the largest sites around the world with thousands of CPUs and petabytes of storage to hand the influx of data. Typically there is no more than one Tier 1/country/experiement. Tier 2's in this nomenclature are generally university sites that have O(100) CPUs and O(100) TB of disk.

"Parallel Internet"? Pfft. (1)

R2.0 (532027) | more than 6 years ago | (#23173964)

It won't be a parallel internet until it too is saturated with porn.

(Unless it's like the parallel Goatee Universe in ST:TOS. In which case all the women will be dressed opaquely from head to toe? Or they will all have beards?)

Re:"Parallel Internet"? Pfft. (1)

getto man d (619850) | more than 6 years ago | (#23173992)

"...the distributed nature of the grid allows them to access that computing power from any part of the worldwide network..." Should be soon.

Re:"Parallel Internet"? Pfft. (2, Funny)

Afecks (899057) | more than 6 years ago | (#23174300)

At first, I read that as Goatse Universe... *shudders*

Re:"Parallel Internet"? Pfft. (1)

m.ducharme (1082683) | more than 6 years ago | (#23174384)

Complete with black hole in the centre...now I have to go disinfect my brain.

Re:"Parallel Internet"? Pfft. (2, Informative)

NatasRevol (731260) | more than 5 years ago | (#23174872)

It wasn't very black...

A million hours overnight? (1)

quangdog (1002624) | more than 6 years ago | (#23174002)

Besides the obvious cool factor (I recall back when earning my undergrad how a fellow student was so excited he could compile Firefox in under 10 hours by using a grid he set up in one of the labs) of being able to crunch massive amounts of data very, very quickly, I'm curious what sorts of applications could use this effectively? Will it be limited to strictly scientific research? Can some of those CPU cycles be sold off to for-profit corporations?

Will pixar be able to render their movies overnight now?

-- Kimball
www.kimballlarsen.com [kimballlarsen.com]

Re:A million hours overnight? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23174140)

How do they get a million CPU hours from 20,000 servers overnight ? Wouldn't it need 50 hours ?

Re:A million hours overnight? (2, Insightful)

imsabbel (611519) | more than 6 years ago | (#23174152)

20k Servers. Not CPUs. And also not cores.

Re:A million hours overnight? (1)

zappepcs (820751) | more than 6 years ago | (#23174156)

You are probably on to something here. I'm betting spam delivery is about to get 1000s of % better very soon. Either that or a CNN DDoS attack from the EU sponsored by particleH4X0R5smashers....

Yeah... (3, Funny)

Uncle Focker (1277658) | more than 6 years ago | (#23174032)

But how well does it play Cyrsis at full settings?

Re:Yeah... (-1, Redundant)

AndrewNeo (979708) | more than 6 years ago | (#23174252)

Internet connection != CPU + Video card performance

Re:Yeah... (0)

Uncle Focker (1277658) | more than 6 years ago | (#23174298)

No shit? Thanks Captain Obvious! Good thing I wasn't talking about the internet connection, but the amount of processing the grid itself can do. Fuck, I can't believe I had to even explain myself...

Re:Yeah... (0, Flamebait)

nawcom (941663) | more than 5 years ago | (#23175108)

sure.. every server has at least a geforce 9 series. you're dumb. The last thing you want a server in a processing cluster to do is process polygons.

Fuck, I can't believe I had to even explain myself...

As you can see your explanation lacks knowledge.

Re:Yeah... (1)

Uncle Focker (1277658) | more than 5 years ago | (#23175410)

sure.. every server has at least a geforce 9 series. you're dumb. The last thing you want a server in a processing cluster to do is process polygons.
Protip: My original post was being facetious. I figured that was obvious, but I guess I forgot that every post on slashdot had to be SERIOUS FUCKING BUSINESS. Have fun as I'm bowing out of this thread.

But does it run... (4, Interesting)

RiotingPacifist (1228016) | more than 6 years ago | (#23174040)

Oh wait ofc it does, youve basically got science which is fundamentally open source.
Then youve got a bunch of scientists who are fundamentally geeks
And its all being setup in Europe, which isnt as under the grip of MS

As a bonus
They need to ability to look back and explain all their analysis which means they have to see the source
It costs a hell of a lot to get the data so they dont want to loose any data anywhere.
They have a lot of results to analyse so they dont want to be waiting for the server to come back on-line.
Could they of gone with BSD? probably, but most science tools are developed for linux.

Re:But does it run... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23177554)

Actually, scientists in the US aren't as dependent on Microsoft as you would think. Many (most?) physicists, mathematicians, and computer scientists use latex rather than Word for publishing, for example. If you see a scientific document written in Word, chances are it comes from a government agency or a third-world country.

Slashdot... (0, Offtopic)

Besna (1175279) | more than 6 years ago | (#23174146)

Facetious. To. The. Core.

And of course the most important question... (1)

djrok212 (801670) | more than 6 years ago | (#23174206)

Will it blend?

Re:And of course the most important question... (1)

glittalogik (837604) | more than 6 years ago | (#23179210)

If it produces a stable black hole, then yes, along with the rest of the planet. In the incredibly unlikely event that that does happen, I can only hope that one of the scientists' last words are "Hey, check this out!"

That was fast. (1)

zedlander (1271502) | more than 6 years ago | (#23174318)

Hey, it's one of those good botnets we just heard about!

Intelligent Design of the Internet? (4, Funny)

OshMan (1246516) | more than 6 years ago | (#23174334)

Perhaps we should give equal time to an alternate post about the Intelligent Design of the Internet.

Re:Intelligent Design of the Internet? (1)

Devv (992734) | more than 5 years ago | (#23176124)

~europe: mv $intelligentdesign /dev/null

You can help too (5, Informative)

Danathar (267989) | more than 6 years ago | (#23174432)

What a lot of people don't know is that if you want to join a cluster to the Open Science Grid and you are a legit organization more than likely they would let you join. Just be sure you understand your responsibilities as it's more of an active participation. If you are a school or computer user group/club go to the open science grid website and start reading up.

Warning: Although not for this crowd. Joining OSG (http://www.opensciencegrid.org/) is a bit more complicated than loading up BOINC or folding@home. It requires a stack of middleware that is distributed as part of OSG's software. Most of the sites I believe use Condor (http://www.cs.wisc.edu/condor/). If you would like to get Condor up and running quick the best way is using ROCKS (http://www.rocksclusters.org/wordpress/) with a Rocks Condor "Roll" (jargon for Rocks condor cluster). Then after getting your condor flock up and running you can load the Open Science Grid stuff on it.

I'm currently running a small cluster of PC's that were destined to be excessed (P4's 3 or 4 years old) and have seen jobs come in and process on my computers! And...to boot you can configure BOINC to act as a backfill mechanism so that when the systems are not running jobs from OSG they can be running BOINC and whatever project you've joined through that project.

BTW...all of the software mentioned is funded under grants from the National Science Foundation - primarily via the Office of CyberInfrastructure but some through other Directorates within NSF.

Re:You can help too (4, Informative)

wart (89140) | more than 5 years ago | (#23175142)

'active' is a bit of an understatement. You need to be willing to provide long term support for the resources that you volunteer to the OSG, including frequent upgrades of the OSG middleware. A resource that joins the OSG for 3 months and then leaves is not going to provide much benefit to the larger OSG community.

It's also not for the faint of heart. While the OSG software installation process has gotten much better over the last couple of years, it still takes several hours for an experienced admin to get a new site up and running, and that's assuming you already have your cluster and batch system (such as Condor or PBS) already configured correctly. If you are new to the OSG, then it is likely to take a week or more before your site is ready for outside use.

Our organization has found that it takes at least one full time admin to manage a medium-sized OSG cluster (~100 PCs), though you can probably get away with less effort for a smaller cluster.

This isn't meant to be criticism against the OSG; I think they've done great work in building up a grid infrastructure in the US. I just want to emphasize that supporting a OSG cluster is a non-trivial effort.

Re:You can help too (1)

Danathar (267989) | more than 6 years ago | (#23178336)

'active' is a bit of an understatement. You need to be willing to provide long term support for the resources that you volunteer to the OSG, including frequent upgrades of the OSG middleware. A resource that joins the OSG for 3 months and then leaves is not going to provide much benefit to the larger OSG community.

It's also not for the faint of heart. While the OSG software installation process has gotten much better over the last couple of years, it still takes several hours for an experienced admin to get a new site up and running, and that's assuming you already have your cluster and batch system (such as Condor or PBS) already configured correctly. If you are new to the OSG, then it is likely to take a week or more before your site is ready for outside use.

Our organization has found that it takes at least one full time admin to manage a medium-sized OSG cluster (~100 PCs), though you can probably get away with less effort for a smaller cluster.

This isn't meant to be criticism against the OSG; I think they've done great work in building up a grid infrastructure in the US. I just want to emphasize that supporting a OSG cluster is a non-trivial effort.
ABSOLUTELY.

You could not of said it better. Much better than I did. Of course you don't necessarily have to run a BIG cluster. Even one with 10 or 20 processors can be of use to people.

I bet you a dollar it doesn't... (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23174506)

... turn the Earth into a black hole.

Evolution of the Internet? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#23174726)

Or intelligent design? You decide!

correction for TFA (1)

wart (89140) | more than 5 years ago | (#23175012)

...the Open Science Grid, which oversees the U.S. infrastructure for the LHC network

Wrong. Caltech oversees the infrastructure for the US LHC network. The OSG provides the middleware and grid operations center for the computing and storage resources in the US that are part of the LHC experiments. The OSG does not manage or oversee communications networks.

YOU FAIL IT (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#23175104)

The party in street And reports and and repor*ts and The failure of W00T

Tech/$/second gt Science/$/second (4, Insightful)

xPsi (851544) | more than 5 years ago | (#23175174)

Practically speaking, trickle-down technology of the sort mentioned in the article is one of the main reasons basic research on this massive scale even has a chance of getting funded with taxpayer dollars. Looking for the Higgs, supersymmetry, and a color glass condensate is cool (important!) scientifically, but it is hard to justify spending 10 billion dollars without some pragmatic output. I'm a high energy physicist by training and would like to think these projects could get funded on their own scientific merit, but I suspect funding agencies would disagree; regardless, technology offshoots of this sort are definitely a good thing.

Cooling (1)

Inquisitus (937664) | more than 5 years ago | (#23177108)

The on-site data centres at CERN are actually terrible when it comes to cooling (at least they were when I went there). I was expecting the server rooms to be low-ceilinged rooms with AC units good enough to keep the rooms at least chilly, but they were actually swelteringly hot, and one of them seemed to be in an old warehouse with very high ceilings.

Uh oh (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23180264)

Their Seti@home team is going to be hard to beat :(

Pfft... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23181176)

...and ISPs are worried about the bandwidth requirements of file sharers ;)

nuke scientists doing this!! (1)

rootpassbird (1276000) | more than 6 years ago | (#23198176)

They're actually connecting to the fucking internet!?!?!

who gave them their degrees?
Check for New Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?