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!

$24.5 Million Linux Supercomputer

CmdrTaco posted more than 12 years ago | from the bigger-is-always-better dept.

Announcements 379

An anonymous reader wrote in to say "Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (US DOE) signed a $24.5 million dollar contract with HP for a Linux supercomputer. This will be one of the top ten fastest computers in the world. Some cool features: 8.3 Trillion Floating Point Operations per Second, 1.8 Terabytes of RAM, 170 Terabytes of disk, (including a 53 TB SAN), and 1400 Intel McKinley and Madison Processors. Nice quote: 'Today's announcement shows how HP has worked to help accelerate the shift from proprietary platforms to open architectures, which provide increased scalability, speed and functionality at a lower cost,' said Rich DeMillo, vice president and chief technology officer at HP. Read Details of the announcement here or here."

cancel ×

379 comments

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

Other OSes (5, Interesting)

frizz (91565) | more than 12 years ago | (#3357890)

What OSes do the other top 10 supercomputers run?

Supercomputer Operating Systems (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3357982)

The verdict from major market research firms is in: they unanimously confirm that the following supercomputer operating systems are DYING:

  • AIX is dying.
  • AmigaOS is dying.
  • BSD is dying.
  • BeOS is dying.
  • CPM is dying.
  • DOS is dying.
  • FreeBSD is dying.
  • GNU Hurd is dying.
  • HP-UX is dying.
  • IRIX is dying.
  • Inferno is dying.
  • Linux is dying.
  • LynxOS is dying.
  • MINIX is dying.
  • MacOS is dying.
  • Mach is dying.
  • MicroC/OS is dying.
  • NachOS is dying.
  • NeXT is dying.
  • Nemesis is dying.
  • NetBSD is dying.
  • NetWare is dying.
  • OS-400 is dying.
  • OS-9 is dying.
  • OS/2 is dying.
  • Oberon is dying.
  • OpenBSD is dying.
  • Palm OS is dying.
  • Plan 9 is dying.
  • pSOS is dying.
  • QNX is dying.
  • RTEMS is dying.
  • SCO is dying.
  • Solaris is dying.
  • SunOS is dying.
  • TRON is dying.
  • ThreadX is dying.
  • TinyOS is dying.
  • Unix is dying.
  • VMS is dying.
  • VxWorks is dying.
  • Windows 2000 is dying.
  • Windows 3.11 is dying.
  • Windows 95 is dying.
  • Windows 98 is dying.
  • Windows CE is dying.
  • Windows ME is dying.
  • Windows NT is dying.
  • Windows XP is dying.
The Free On-Line Dictionary of Computing [foldoc.org] defines an operating system as: "The low-level software which handles the interface to peripheral hardware, schedules tasks, allocates storage, and presents a default interface to the user when no application program is running. The OS may be split into a kernel which is always present and various system programs which use facilities provided by the kernel to perform higher-level house-keeping tasks, often acting as servers in a client-server relationship. Some would include a graphical user interface and window system as part of the OS, others would not.

The operating system loader, BIOS, or other firmware required at boot time or when installing the operating system would generally not be considered part of the operating system, though this distinction is unclear in the case of a rommable operating system such as RISC OS. The facilities an operating system provides and its general design philosophy exert an extremely strong influence on programming style and on the technical cultures that grow up around the machines on which it runs.

cool! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3358163)

but at least OS X isn't dying...

Re:Other OSes (5, Informative)

hawkstone (233083) | more than 12 years ago | (#3358153)

1. IBM ASCI White,SP Power3 375 MHz
Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory

It runs AIX.

2. Compaq AlphaServer SC ES45/1GHz
Pittsburgh Supercomputing Center

Haven't used it, but I'm guessing Tru64.

3. IBM SP Power3 375 MHz 16 way
NERSC/LBNL

Once again, AIX.

4. Intel ASCI Red
Sandia National Labs

A poor home-grown OS (no offence) called Cougar or TFlops which doesn't even support X11 or sockets.

5. IBM ASCI Blue-Pacific SST,IBM SP 604e
Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory

Can you say AIX?

6. Compaq AlphaServer SC ES45/1GHz
Los Alamos National Laboratory

I assume Tru64.

7. Hitachi SR8000/MPP
University of Tokyo

No idea. Sorry.

8. SGI ASCI Blue Mountain
Los Alamos National Laboratory

IRIX.

9. IB SP Power3 375 MHz
Naval Oceanographic Office

Don't know for sure, but you can bet it's AIX.

10. IBM SP Power3 375 MHz 16 way
Deutscher Wetterdienst

Again, I'm sure it's AIX.

All Unix. No, no linux on there yet, but Pacific Northwest will be right up there near the top, and Lawrence Livermore is also probably getting a linux cluster of almost that size pretty soon. That will make two in the top few slots.

No Windows on these puppies! ;)

Heck, I could use one of these (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3357896)

I need a supercomputer to replace the pile of junk sitting on my desktop. Who needs a Beowulf cluster when you have this.

What would a cluster of these be like? (0, Offtopic)

Qbertino (265505) | more than 12 years ago | (#3357897)

Sorry, couldn't resist. :-)
BTW: First Post? Hope so. Jippeee...

Shame about the lack of disk (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3357898)

... I guess its just for processor intensive rather than data intensive tasks. So, spy or military is the question ....

And this would be even faster (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3357911)

If they used a real OS [microsoft.com]

Re:And this would be even faster (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3357941)

Either that or beaten up the computer with a baseball bat - you choose.

Re:And this would be even faster (1)

inkblot69 (139068) | more than 12 years ago | (#3358007)

You mean Microsoft's Xenix?

Re:And this would be even faster (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3358073)

Nope. MS-DOS.

I find it a little disturbing that I still haven't been Minusonetrolled.

Re:And this would be even faster (2, Funny)

RazorJ_2000 (164431) | more than 12 years ago | (#3358076)

Yah, because they need the horsepower to run solitaire...


Oh wow... (1)

Ixe (547791) | more than 12 years ago | (#3358165)

Just think how fast I could crash!

is your friend (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3357916)

yes it is.

Imagine (0, Redundant)

cca93014 (466820) | more than 12 years ago | (#3357918)

a beowolf cluster of those...

Re:Imagine (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3358064)

omg! that was so original and hilarious!

Gee, that's fast... (0, Offtopic)

gTsiros (205624) | more than 12 years ago | (#3357921)

...but does it run Serious Sam?! Who gives a damn about a computer if you can't hear Sam's magnificent "WooHoo! Let's go bowling" quote before you woop some kleer ass ;)

Wow... good thing they chose linux... (5, Funny)

FortKnox (169099) | more than 12 years ago | (#3357924)

... Cause if they put WinXP Pro on it, the project would cost:
$24,500,399.98
Which was juuust over budget!

BTW - Can you put in code during the "post slashdot story" to automatically close the <I> tags? I don't think that would be too difficult to add...

SUCK MY PUSSY (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3357976)

That is all.

Re:SUCK MY PUSSY (-1)

flaw1 (572429) | more than 12 years ago | (#3358032)

I'm sorry, I don't swing that way.

Re:Wow... good thing they chose linux... (0, Offtopic)

KDENCE (558103) | more than 12 years ago | (#3357983)

Dude, if I had any mod points at least one would be yours man. This is way too funny!

Re:Wow... good thing they chose linux... (5, Funny)

mike_scheck (512662) | more than 12 years ago | (#3358011)

Not to mention, they would have 1368 wasted CPU's......

Re:Wow... good thing they chose linux... (1)

SuperDaveTX (567919) | more than 12 years ago | (#3358053)

Is that using the per processor or per user licensing scheme? Of course this is all moot since W2K DataCenter can only handle 32 processors. (what a hoss!!) ;-)

Why Linux Sucks (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3357926)

Here's a short list of Linux flaws that make it look silly:

* /usr/include/linux (come on. honestly.) Lame. Nonstandard. (for the clue-deprived, this means that any code written for linux using the linux/ headers will be incompatible with all other Unix flavors.) Guess what: string.h, types.h, malloc.h, signal.h, and so-on don't belong in a platform-specific include directory. Hope you didn't want to port your code...
* Neither the sigaction manpage nor the signal.h includs indicate what the system defaults are. Of course, they've put signal.h in /usr/include/linux...
* "intro" manpages are a joke. Compare the BSD section 2 intro with the one from Linux.
* file systems mount async by default (power outage and your fs dies)
* Most linux users don't have pubes yet and are intolerably lame [slashdot.org] (3Y3 4m 1337 H4x0r d00d [uz 3y3 h4v3 L1Nux!)
* Too many things in user space that belong in the kernel (nfs)
* Too many things in the kernel that belong in user space (java)
* No standard distribution. Linux people say this is a good thing? Try writing software or software configuration instructions when you never know how the OS is going to be laid out, or try finding the responsible party for a block of OS code, or try fixing security problems when they arise and you'll see that this is NOT a good thing at all.
* no consistant pronunciation the os'es name (line-ucks? lynn-ucks?)
* svr4? bsd? make up your mind?
* Lame NFS & dd [spatula.net]
* #linux, #hack, #linuxwarez...
* New kernel every week that breaks [spatula.net] half your applications
* Security flaw/Root compromise of the week (see below)
* glibc? libc? libc5? libc6? glibc2?
* /bin/sh != sh; /bin/sh == bash. Lame. Nonstandard. Result: broken shell scripts and nonportable code.
* /usr/bin/make != make; /usr/bin/make == gmake. Lame. Nonstandard. Same result as above: nonportable code.
* ext2fs
* Linux will mount partitions that are not clean
* can't handle partitions > 2GB (i've hear they finally fixed this one)
* e2fsck deliberatly leaves/creates corrupt files (if there is a block that it duplicate between two files, e2fsck will clone the duplicate (while fsck will remove both files. This can also result in a user gaining unauthorized access to another user's data.))
* it swap likes swap to swap swap too swap often swap
* only allows 128M of swap at a time; for a 1G of swap, you need 8 swap partitions
* can't handle more than 1GB of RAM
* To install Joe's program, you need Bob's kernel hack, but for Bob's kernel hack, you've got to have Suzy's patches, but Suzy's patches only work with a year-old kernel, unless you get Mike's patches to Suzy's patches, but even then, those conflict with Jeff's drivers, which can be resolved only by installing Nancy's patches...
* Can't handle the same IP on more than one interface
* Can't handle large files [spatula.net]
* Max file size: 2GB. (*BSD: 4 Terabytes)
* Dynamically linked root shell. Doom!
* lilo! any boot loader that needs to have magic block numbers is wrong
* linux icmp.h is *NOT* unix icmp.h - they're totally incompatible.
* flatfile password files make listing large ftp directories impossible due to huge numbers of flatfile searchces.
* password file can be non-shadowed - encrypted passwords visible to all
* shadow.h! hahahahahahaha!
* Slowass network code [nfr.net]
* Did I mention slowass network code? [rmci.net]
* Oh, also slowass network code [spatula.net]
* Miserably pathetic threading implementation doesn't scale for shit: all threads wake up on signals (stampeding process problem).
* L1nux c0d3rz! [spatula.net]
* LILO can't cope with kernels > 1Mb, so the kernel has to be gzipped.
* strfry and memfrob
* Can't cope with hard drives > 32GB
* GPL - a license and a virus
* Fundamental design and direction problems. [spatula.net] It turns out that Linus is not the smartest man in the world and the saviour of all mankind.
* OS or religion?
* UNABLE TO LOAD INTERPRETER...memory leak much?
* This is a real Linux error message: Uhhh. NMI recieved. Dazed and Confused. Trying to cope ...such professionalism!
*The GNU su manpage [freebsd.org] actually says this:
This program does not support a "wheel group" that restricts who can su to super-user accounts, because that can help fascist system administrators hold unwarranted power over other users. ...apparently it's better for any user to attack the root password than to offer added security. Ignorance of security is a common Linux thread.
* vi != vi; vi == vim. vim links to X libraries. Wipe X, and now you can't use vi. Retards.
* Still no USB support in 2000, after NetBSD and FreeBSD have had it for nearly 2 years. So much for the "million geeks" theory of rapid software development.
* Always trying to help you hold your weewee [freebsd.org] when you're going tinkle.
* No version control used to manage the system.

Re:Why Linux Sucks (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3357987)

Do some research. Nearly every one of your comments is incorrect, and has been for several years. I don't even have the time to address them individualy, since you babble on nonstop.

Re:Why Linux Sucks (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3358074)

I think the reason why you don't address them is because you cannot refute them.
Stop looking at the world through Linus's rose colored glasses.

Re:Why Linux Sucks (-1)

flaw1 (572429) | more than 12 years ago | (#3358113)

That's hilarious! More so because it's so frighteningly accurate.

Normally I'd be saying something about how Windows is better and your favourite OS is a toy, but your favourite OS isn't Lunix so I can't do that.

Sigh... (4, Funny)

buckeyeguy (525140) | more than 12 years ago | (#3357928)

all that capability and all I can think about is how much power the dang thing would consume... it'll take one big, big UPS/power conditioner.

is it just me... (1)

mraymer (516227) | more than 12 years ago | (#3357930)

or did the author forget to end an italic tag in this story?

Cluster (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3357935)

Imagine a cluster of a few of these ;)

Sorry, couldnt resist....

Uhmm... (5, Funny)

qurob (543434) | more than 12 years ago | (#3357939)


Scheduled to be fully operational in early 2003...


Won't it be obsolete by then?

Those CPUs aren't available yet.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3357946)

McKinley will be released in the middle of this year and Madison will be released in the first half of the next year.

It will take at least a year before this Supercomputer will be functional.

Re:Those CPUs aren't available yet.... (1)

buckeyeguy (525140) | more than 12 years ago | (#3357981)

Since HP is an insider on that Itanium development, I'd imagine they'll have 'em in hand before the rest of us do.

cool (-1)

Adolf Hitroll (562418) | more than 12 years ago | (#3357947)

Hewlett-Compaq have sold their first machine!

I vant your sex (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3358134)

I am a poor German faggot. Mein interests include Linux and Slashdot. Mein Fuehrur, I vish to have anal intercourse vit you. Vould you allow me?

Benji (0, Redundant)

KDENCE (558103) | more than 12 years ago | (#3357950)

I have one of these on my desktop right now! I am not running Linux though, I am running Palm OS. However, I only use it to play solitaire and for my address book.

Sincerely,
Benjamin Franklin

What a waste (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3357951)

WE have someone willing to spend $24.5 million just to get a machine to play Quake a little bit faster! Have you any idea what that money could do for starving children in India, Iraq, and Japan?

Re:What a waste (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3358133)

Here's an idea...if they didn't have the children in the first place then they wouldn't be starving. Oversimplification? Perhaps. Or perhaps starvation is simply part of nature's unique method of creating balance and order.

will it run windows? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3357952)

Imagine how fast it could crash!

How to Remove Linux and Install Windows XP (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3357957)

How to Remove Linux and Install Windows XP (Q314458)

The information in this article applies to:

* Microsoft Windows XP Home Edition

* Microsoft Windows XP Professional

For a Microsoft Windows 2000 version of this article, see Q247804 .

SUMMARY

This article explains how to remove the Linux operating system from your computer and install Windows XP. This article assumes that Linux is already installed on your computer's hard disk, that Linux native and Linux swap partitions are in use (which are incompatible with Windows XP), and that there is no free space left on the hard disk.

NOTE : Windows XP and Linux can coexist on the same computer. For additional information, refer to your Linux documentation.

MORE INFORMATION

To install Windows XP on a computer on which Linux is currently installed (and assuming that you want to remove Linux), you must manually delete the partitions used by the Linux operating system. The Windows-compatible partition can be created automatically during the installation of Windows XP.

IMPORTANT : Before you follow the steps in this article, verify that you have a bootable disk or bootable CD-ROM for the Linux operating system, because these steps completely remove the Linux operating system from your computer. If you intend to restore the Linux operating system at a later date, verify that you also have a functional backup of all the information stored on your computer. Additionally, you must have a full release version of Windows XP to use during this installation. If you intend to use a Windows XP upgrade CD-ROM, a CD-ROM of a qualifying Windows product must be available. Setup from the Windows XP upgrade CD-ROM will prompt you for this CD-ROM.

Linux file systems use a superblock at the beginning of a disk partition to identify the basic size, shape, and condition of the file system.

The Linux operating system is generally installed on partition type 83 (Linux native) or 82 (Linux swap). The Linux boot manager (LILO) can be configured to start from either of the following locations:

* The hard disk Master Boot Record (MBR)

-or-

* The root folder of the Linux partition

The Fdisk tool included with Linux can be used to delete the partitions. (There are other utilities that work just as well, such as Fdisk from MS-DOS 5.0 and later, or you can delete the partitions during the installation process.)

To remove Linux from your computer and install Windows XP, follow these steps:

1. Remove the native, swap, and boot partitions used by Linux:

1. Start your computer with the Linux Setup floppy disk, type fdisk at the command prompt, and then press ENTER.

NOTE : For help with using the Fdisk tool, type m at the command prompt, and then press ENTER.

# Type p at the command prompt, and then press ENTER to display partition information. The first item listed is hard disk 1, partition 1 information , and the second item listed is hard disk 1, partition 2 information .

# Type d at the command prompt, and then press ENTER. You are then prompted for the partition number that you want to delete. Type 1 , and then press ENTER to delete partition number 1. Repeat this step until all the partitions have been deleted.

# Type w , and then press ENTER to write this information to the partition table. Some error messages may be generated (because information is written to the partition table), but they should not be significant at this point because the next step is to restart the computer and then install the new operating system.

# Type q at the command prompt, and then press ENTER to quit the Fdisk tool.

# Insert either a bootable floppy disk or the bootable Windows XP CD-ROM, and then press CTRL+ALT+DELETE to restart your computer.

2. Follow the instructions on the screen to install Windows XP.

The installation process assists you in creating the appropriate partitions on your computer.

Sample Linux Partition Tables
Single SCSI Drive

Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System
/dev/sda1 * 1 500 4016218 83 Linux native (SCSI hard drive 1, partition 1)
/dev/sda2 501 522 176715 82 Linux swap (SCSI hard drive 1, partition 2)

Multiple SCSI Drives

Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System
/dev/sda1 * 1 500 4016218 83 Linux native (SCSI hard drive 1, partition 1)
/dev/sda2 501 522 176715 82 Linux swap (SCSI hard drive 1, partition 2)
/dev/sdb1 1 500 4016218 83 Linux native (SCSI hard drive 2, partition 1)

Single IDE Drive

Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System
/dev/hda1 * 1 500 4016218 83 Linux native (IDE hard drive 1, partition 1)
/dev/hda2 501 522 176715 82 Linux swap (IDE hard drive 1, partition 2)

Multiple IDE Drives

Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System
/dev/hda1 * 1 500 4016218 83 Linux native (IDE hard drive 1, partition 1)
/dev/hda2 501 522 176715 82 Linux swap (IDE hard drive 1, partition 2)
/dev/hdb1 1 500 4016218 83 Linux native (IDE hard drive 2, partition 1)

Additionally, Linux recognizes more than 40 different partition types, including the following:

* FAT 12 (Type 01)

* FAT 16 > 32 M Primary (Type 06)

* FAT 16 Extended (Type 05)

* FAT 32 w/o LBA Primary (Type 0b)

* FAT 32 w/LBA Primary (Type 0c)

* FAT 16 w/LBA (Type 0e)

* FAT 16 w/LBA Extended (Type 0f)

Note that there are other ways to remove the Linux operating system and install Windows XP. The preceding method is included in this article because of the assumptions that the Linux operating system is already functioning and there is no more room on the hard disk. There are methods for changing partition sizes with software designed for managing partitions. Disk partitioning software may cause instability with the Windows XP installation. Microsoft does not support the installation of Windows XP on partitions manipulated in this manner.

You can also use an MS-DOS version 5.0-or-later boot disk, a Microsoft Windows 95 Startup disk, or a Microsoft Windows 98 Startup disk that contains the Fdisk utility to remove an operating system from the hard disk and install a different operating system. When you start Fdisk and multiple drives are installed on your computer, you are presented with five choices; use option 5 to select the hard disk that has the partition to be deleted. After that (or if you have only one hard disk), select option 3 ( Delete partition or logical DOS drive ), and then select option 4 ( Delete non-DOS partition ). You should then see the non-MS-DOS partitions that you want to delete. Typically, the Linux operating system has two non-MS-DOS partitions, but there may be more. After you delete one partition, use the same steps to delete any other appropriate non-MS-DOS partitions.

For additional information about how to use the Fdisk utility, click the article number below to view the article in the Microsoft Knowledge Base:
Q255867 How to Use the Fdisk Tool and the Format Tool to Partition or Repartition a Hard Disk After you delete the partitions, you can create partitions and install the operating system that you want. You can create only one primary partition and an extended partition with multiple logical drives by using Fdisk from MS-DOS version 5.0-and-later, Windows 95, and Windows 98. The maximum FAT16 primary partition size is 2 gigabytes (GB). The largest FAT16 logical drive size is 2 GB.

For additional information, click the article number below to view the article in the Microsoft Knowledge Base:
Q105074 MS-DOS 6.2 Partitioning Questions and Answers When you install Windows XP, the Linux partitions can be removed and new partitions created and formatted with the appropriate file system type during the installation process. Windows XP allows you to create more than one primary partition. Windows XP does recognize the FAT32 file system. During the installation of Windows XP, you can create a very large FAT32 drive. The FAT32 drive can be converted to NTFS after the installation has completed, if appropriate.

For additional information about how to multiboot with Windows XP, click the article number below to view the article in the Microsoft Knowledge Base:
Q306559 HOW TO: Create a Multiple-Boot System with Windows XP For more information, browse to the following Microsoft Web site:
http://www.microsoft.com/windows2000/techin fo/admi nistration/management/mltiboot.asp The third-party contact information included in this article is provided to help you find the technical support you need. This contact information is subject to change without notice. Microsoft in no way guarantees the accuracy of this third-party contact information.

The third-party products discussed in this article are manufactured by vendors independent of Microsoft; we make no warranty, implied or otherwise, regarding these products' performance or reliability.

can i haggle the sticker price?? (1)

dryueh (531302) | more than 12 years ago | (#3357965)

increased scalability, speed and functionality at a lower cost

A lower cost? Hell...maybe I'll pick one up after work today. With a price tag of only 24.5 million, you're actually making money with this purchase (or, as cases dictate, losing money by not taking advantage of this offer)!

Sheesh. I think 'reduced' cost is more appropriate.

Cool (2, Funny)

jhines0042 (184217) | more than 12 years ago | (#3357967)

All I can say is:

"I have GOT to get me one of these!"
-- Will Smith, "Independence Day"

(42 Karma, don't mod me)

Die (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3358101)

Do the world a favour and kill yourself, bitch.

in the immortal words of the old man... (2)

Em Emalb (452530) | more than 12 years ago | (#3357968)

painting the football field...

great good googly moogly.

awesome, lets just hope it functions as it is designed to, could be a huge publicity boost for Linux....

Re:in the immortal words of the old man... (1)

FortKnox (169099) | more than 12 years ago | (#3358018)

Good job, but who are the "chefs"?

Re:in the immortal words of the old man... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3358054)

DUDE!

Now that "Great Googly Moogly" line is echoing around in my head - I know it from somewhere, BUT WHERE?!?! WHERE IS IT FROM?!?! Google wasn't much help, ironically.

Re:in the immortal words of the old man... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3358087)

Snickers commercial. "Not going anywhere for a while?" campaign.

Old man painting a football field -- screws up "Chiefs" by mispelling it "Chefs". Football player points it out to him. Insert witty exclamation.

make it public (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3357969)

If it is so open, they should let us all have shell accounts on it.

11 responses... (1, Redundant)

evacuate_the_bull (517290) | more than 12 years ago | (#3357974)

and already 4 comments about a beowolf cluster of these things. cmon slashdot, you can do better than that

Re:11 responses... (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3358021)

Imagine a Beowulf cluster of Beowulf cluster comments.

Re:11 responses... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3358085)

You're expecting original thought in here? Hah :)
I've seen more original material in Apple advocacy newsgroups.

Ahhhh... I see... (5, Funny)

psxndc (105904) | more than 12 years ago | (#3357975)

So THIS is what we'll need to run PerlBox. :-)

psxndc

1,800 intel processors? (1)

qurob (543434) | more than 12 years ago | (#3357980)


Let's see the story when they make one with 1,800 AMD processors!

Re:1,800 intel processors? (2)

Slynkie (18861) | more than 12 years ago | (#3358044)

Nonono, don't you remember? AMD is evil this week [slashdot.org] .

Re:1,800 intel processors? (1)

pstreck (558593) | more than 12 years ago | (#3358149)

lol, amd is evil, intel is the borg.. what about 1800 POWER3-II procs... mmmm more power. thats it i have ram envy

Re:1,800 intel processors? (1)

RazorJ_2000 (164431) | more than 12 years ago | (#3358154)

1,800 Intel processors, eh! Damn, I can't think of a MS O/S that will run on it. Maybe it's because MS doesn't have a truly scalable O/S. Yah, yah, cheap shot.



Re:1,800 intel processors? (1)

archen (447353) | more than 12 years ago | (#3358155)

And the story would be "people for a 100 mile radius blinded by ball of fire created by 1,800 AMD processor computer"

Re:1,800 intel processors? (0)

morbid (4258) | more than 12 years ago | (#3358162)

They had to find some way to dump all those itanic processors that nobody wants. Maybe they got a big discount for quantities over 1000?

Imagine Quake 3 on this (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3357984)

I wonder what fps you'd get.

Re:Imagine Quake 3 on this (-1)

flaw1 (572429) | more than 12 years ago | (#3358176)

Quake 3 is gay, CamperSnipe fucking rocks. It's so shit^H^H^H^Hrealistic.

Sweet (3, Funny)

ImaLamer (260199) | more than 12 years ago | (#3357990)


That answers my question of what I would have done if I won the Powerball last night

Something in this story (0, Offtopic)

MrFredBloggs (529276) | more than 12 years ago | (#3357991)

is turning SlashDot into an Italic hell!

Quake (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3357993)

How fast would it run quake?

Someone's going to say it sooner or later... (0, Offtopic)

ari{Dal} (68669) | more than 12 years ago | (#3357998)

Might as well be me.

1) Imagine a beowolf cluster...
2) Can that thing run Quake?
3) Finally! A harddrive big enough for my MP3 collection!

Seriously though, it's nice to see these companies working together to further common platforms. And running linux! If this doesn't show the power of linux scalability, nothing EVER will.

It's official: Slashdot is dying (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3358005)

(Reposted from an eariler story -- worth reading.)

It is now official - a Slashdot poll has confirmed: Slashdot is dying

Yet another crippling bombshell hit the beleaguered Slashdot community when recently a poll on the site confirmed that up-to-date and factually-correct stories account for less than 40 percent of all submitted news stories, that the user-moderation system has fallen to pieces through the oppressive power of the editors, and that subscribers don't need to pay and can use such software as JunkBuster to filter out adverts. Coming on the heels of the latest MSNBC survey which plainly states that Slashdot has lost more readers, this news serves to reinforce what we've known all along. Slashdot is collapsing in complete disarray, as further exemplified by failing dead last [kuro5hin.com] in the recent Kuro5hin technology site popularity test.

You don't need to be a Kreskin [amdest.com] to predict Slashdot's future. The hand writing is on the wall: Slashdot faces a bleak future. In fact there won't be any future at all for it because Slashdot is dying. Things are looking very bad for the site. As many of us are already aware, Slashdot continues to lose readers. Red ink flows like a river of blood. The subscribers scheme is the most endangered of them all, having lost 62% of its paying readers.

Let's keep to the facts and look at the numbers.

Slashdot editor Rob Malda (CmdrTaco) states that there are 700 paying subscribers to Slashdot. How many normal readers are there? Let's see. The number of subscriber versus reader posts on Slashdot is roughly in ratio of 1 to 4. Therefore there are about 700*4 = 2800 normal casual readers. Anonymous Coward posts are about half of the volume of the typical posts. Therefore there are about 1400 readers who can't be bothered setting up an account. A recent article put the Trolls, who post sexual insults, foul ASCII art pictures and links to vile sites, at about 80 percent of the Slashdot readership. Therefore there are (700+8400+4200)*4 = 19600 trolling readers. This is consistent with the number of Troll posts.

Due to the troubles of Andover.net, abysmal hit counts and so on, Slashdot went out of business and was taken over by OSDN who run another troubled site. Now OSDN is also dead, its corpse turned over to yet another charnel house.

All major surveys show that Slashdot has steadily declined in readership. It is very sick and its long term survival prospects are very dim. If Slashdot is to survive at all it will be among geeky hobbyist dabblers. Slashdot continues to decay. Nothing short of a miracle could save it at this point in time. For all practical purposes, Slashdot is dead.

So why now? Why did Slashdot fail? Once you get over the myriad of incompatible personalities, particularly among the editors who have repeatedly failed to check for serious inaccuracies in their stories (see the FreeBSD 4.5 "release" as a shocking example), it's clear that subscribers will continue to decrease. Using software such as JunkBuster, readers can eliminate adverts without having to pay any money. These two significant factors, along with the corrupted "moderation" scheme (where editors have infinite power over the regular moderators), only confirm yet further that Slashdot's glory days are coming to an end.

Fact: Slashdot is dying

Re:It's official: Slashdot is dying (1)

Arsewiper (535175) | more than 12 years ago | (#3358109)

For someone with such stong opinions it'a pity you weren't brave enough to own them. Poor effort Microsoft. Slashdot will probably outlast you once your shareholders wake up.

Wow - that is a big swap space! (5, Funny)

gosand (234100) | more than 12 years ago | (#3358015)

1.8 Terabytes of RAM

So does that mean it has 3.6 Terabytes of swap space?

Re:Wow - that is a big swap space! (-1)

pstreck (558593) | more than 12 years ago | (#3358170)

lol, "Ram is like sex, it's better when it's real"

Insanely expensive (4, Interesting)

Jeff Knox (1093) | more than 12 years ago | (#3358029)

Wow, do the math thats $17,500 per processor (node). Thats 24.5 million divided by 1400. Whats the deal with that? Even with top of the line components, the fastest interconnects available (Dolphin or Myrinet or whatever), thats a 7 million dollar computer at most (5 grand a machine, with SCI could even build much faster then a 8Teraflop box, hell a dual Athlon or Intel based system would be cheaper and whale on that). Software? Nothing, althought they are probably going to use Scyld or something and pay the bucks. Im willing to bet that half that cost pure adminstrative and contract over head and support.

Re:Insanely expensive (5, Interesting)

Raleel (30913) | more than 12 years ago | (#3358089)

AFAIK, 1/2 of the cost of each node is the interconnect, which has 1-3microsecond latency and gigabit bandwidth. The 24.5 million figure also includes a huge storage array on fibre channel (like 150 terabytes, I believe). And note, each node has 12 gig of ram.

Support is one reason. (2)

TheViffer (128272) | more than 12 years ago | (#3358156)

Its for the package, not just the hardware. It could even include tax and shipping.

big deal is (1, Interesting)

Ilgaz (86384) | more than 12 years ago | (#3358034)

so, what will that supercomputer will be used for? Arms? Petrol? Investigation? What?

I wouldn't be happy for such thing happen...

Surprised it's intel based... (1)

pstreck (558593) | more than 12 years ago | (#3358043)

I'm kinda surprised to see that this computer is actually running on intel proccessors. Typically when this kind of horse power is required while a risc processor gets chosen. I'm not real familiar with the itanium other than i know it's a 64bit proc, and the workstations are REAL expensive :) The question is how does the itanium compare to it's oppenents like the POWER3-II copper based chip?

Re:Surprised it's intel based... (1)

5.25" Floppy (79917) | more than 12 years ago | (#3358140)

Actually, (although your mileage may vary!) the Intel processors are often faster. Having run some CFD applications on a POWER3-II (375Mhz) and on an Athlon MP 1600+, the Athlon outperformed the POWER3-II by a factor of 2.3!.

The advantage of the POWER3-II based systems lies in the fact that you can have large SMP systems, large memory access, etc. (It's a 64-bit chip)

Now, the latest RISC from IBM is actually the POWER4... and it boasts some damn impressive SPEC marks. I haven't run on one yet, but from what I hear, I can expect it to be slightly faster than my Athlon 1600+... but with the Athlon MP 2000+ out, and the price difference between that and the POWER4 - well, I like my Athlons.

Ciao!

(PS. Oh, and unfortunately, I have no data on running on an Itanium. But if the commodity chips work so damn well, why bother?)

HP sucks (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3358047)

I work at a medium sized ISP in a south american country, we have had several problems with our HP LT and LS servers, the hard disks are disposable. After several hard disks replacements I had to use a linux software raid to get around those crappy hard disks, it saved my life once already.

Anyways, I hope this super computer DOESNT use the same kind of disks, if not, you will feel... PAIN

*cough* bullshit *cough* (1, Troll)

evilpaul13 (181626) | more than 12 years ago | (#3358048)

"Open architecture"? How many other "open architectures" are only and will only be manufactured by one company (Intel)? Itanium is as closed as they come. I've gottta go out now, and buy that "Open Windows" Microsoft just started selling.

McKinley isn't out yet, and Madison is its successor. Why don't they just build it using Pentium 8s and Athlon XP 52s?

Sure, mod me a troll for not eating up the nonsensical marketing garbage that is being passed off as a news story. Did HP start advertising on /.?

Re:*cough* bullshit *cough* (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3358099)

I'd expect to be modded down by the closed minded 14 year old Wintel whores that read /.

Just in time... (1)

HiQ (159108) | more than 12 years ago | (#3358050)

I think that this will be one of the few machines in the world to run the Perl desktop on a reasonable speed ;)

where's the hurd? (1)

squidinkcalligraphy (558677) | more than 12 years ago | (#3358055)

Geez, ud think they might just invest a little R&D into the hurd and have an even more scalable OS.

Can you tell what it is yet? (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3358065)

Hint: the answer lies at this marvellous page [goatse.cx] .

* g o a t s e x * g o a t s e x * g o a t s e x *
g88888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888g
o8/88888\8888888888888\888888888888/8888\8888888o
a|8888888|8888888888888\8888888888|888888|888888a
t|8888888`.8888888888888|888888888|8888888:88888t
s`88888888|8888888888888|88888888\|8888888|88888s
e8\8888888|8/8888888/88\\\888--__8\\8888888:8888e
x88\888888\/888_--~~8888888888~--__|8\88888|8888x
*888\888888\_-~88888888888888888888~-_\8888|8888*
g0000\_00000\00000000_.--------.______\|000|0000g
o000000\00000\______//0_0___0_0(_(__>00\000|000 0o
a0000000\000.00C0___)00______0(_(____>00|00/000 0a
t0000000/\0|000C0____)/ \0(_____>00|_/00000t
s000000/0/\|000C_____) |00(___>000/00\0000s
e00000|000(000_C_____)\______/00//0_/0/00000\000e
x00000|0000\00|__000\\_________//0(__/0000000|00x
*0000|0\0000\____)000`----000--'0000000000000|00*
g0000|00\_0000000000___\ /_0000000000_/0|0g
o000|00000000000000/0000| |00\000000000000|o
a000|0000000000000|0000/ \00\00000000000|0a
t666|6666666666/6/6666| |66\66666666666|0t
s666|666666666/6/666666\__/\___/6666|6666666666|s
e66|66666666666/66666666| |6666666|666666666|e
x66|6666666666|666666666| |6666666|666666666|x
* g o a t s e x * g o a t s e x * g o a t s e x *
  • Because asasd [goatse.cx]

    you may not think

    that it is obvious

    was shot in the face

    with a gun.

    was a little baby

    sdf sdfs w3rwdf wer dfsxv wer435 df 235 325rsf dwf 234 2352 efsdfs

    kjashlskfh lasdfjhasldfh ladsjhlashf fhldshf lsadjhsaldf sdfhs aldkhfsdlf
    aslkjf pewnr 3224 asdj82 wdrf 324 asf wq4 234 sed safdsd f3w523 5 dwf df 23 4 234 234sdf. saflku 2wer sadf er3 df we5 132tdwa fet 425 6 wqef qw5e dg fdee wr6y 3rt wet e 6243 6 dsf fg dj e 341 563wqlkejq lqwk ejqlwkje qlw ejlqwe jqlw euqop4u 231b4qs dfasxw 5 3245. 342 345qwdaf asrt34q5 3q. 7 r, sdoifu oweiur ow qeur98 y3294y d sdg av fighef hishfiewrh ti3yr q q5ru w0tu 9wer9uq32y42 0 oy ifehisdfhisudyf iqw iu hweto yw9!

    Once upon a time there

    er after, until he

    was shot in the face

    with a gun.

    sdfjh 304ujr osdhc 9whe9hrti fnse f34 5ef sdf 235ui wodfpi sa, wdfjh ss9 8ywdr fbq3r 2erwdfaw qw3e qwer sdf, 3r wejfdoi hwadof oewrj erfawf e, woweru owuero uwqeoru ower sw d q3e qfs! sldkj oad asdasd. wqer wdf sdg 45y ut5.

    54yt4 9wue wqr erg rt 4 6dfs qw 434 457 rt udf gsadh rowqyr123 52e jxf wweor wer 23 f 4 6 4ry

    asd qwrw, weriwfd hiuwr!

    ksdfh sdfedg er h tyheqtweads tru r5 wery ywet ewt w. ewrt r u e tu retrt y qrew yrt u uueweqy u

    w et fgcbcb. 3lurodj firthiqwuh.fsd fvwq et 435 egf, 435t foigj orejtp0w 0ut034ut9 u0weuf 0wdtu werjtowhr ib325 34 6te rg sdf 3e!

    .

Re:Can you tell what it is yet? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3358141)

I could never figure out how to post these ASCII pictures... Once I learn, I'll be quick to make a much of +1 crap flood posts (I'm at 50 points again :).

Can you write a short tutorial?

Figures for the layman (4, Funny)

popeyethesailor (325796) | more than 12 years ago | (#3358067)

1) 8.4 TFLOPS lets you find the sum of 4.2+4.2, 168 trillion times a second.
2) 170 TB can hold 42.5 thousand times the contents of the entire Library of Congress books .(+ all the MP3s you downloaded )
3) 1 TB of RAM may let you run as many as 13 Windows applications simultaneously.

Effect on linux ? (3, Interesting)

nilsj (266737) | more than 12 years ago | (#3358068)

How will this affect linux ?
Will HP come up with something revolutionary in linux development while constructing this system or is the tech used conventional - just on a bigger scale ?

and it still can't break 3des (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3358069)

and it still can't break 3des

Banking heavily on McKinley not tanking. (5, Interesting)

Christopher Thomas (11717) | more than 12 years ago | (#3358078)

They're awfully confident of McKinley not following in the footsteps of Merced if they've placed this order.

This raises an interesting question, though. If you want to build a high-performance compute cluster nowadays... what do you build it out of? The old answer, Alpha, doesn't really apply any more.

Sun is optimized for communications bandwidth, not FLOPS, and I'm not sure if SGI even _offers_ machines that huge. HP is betting on IA64. And x86 is competely unsuitable, for memory space reasons if nothing else.

What am I missing?

Not a lot of people know this... (-1, Troll)

Sobrique (543255) | more than 12 years ago | (#3358086)

Well, not a lot of people know this, but there are a whole bunch of optimisations that have crept into the linux Kernel but are note enabled by default because they've been thought 'unstable'.
One of these is 'exec mode'. When enabled, the linux kernel uses a smart caching algorithm to speed up application load/start times.
It's actually quite easy to install too. Simply add the line 'exec true' to your system profile (/etc/profile generally). It's possible to enable on a per user basis by inserting this into a .bashrc or .profile (depending on shell) but obviously then the system operations don't gain the benefit.

Don't listen to this! (2)

BitwizeGHC (145393) | more than 12 years ago | (#3358158)

ACK!!!

On my system, at least, this would make the system unusable!!! 'exec' is a shell builtin that calls execve() to replace the shell process with another process. 'true' just returns a true value to a shell script, and does nothing really.

Be careful of this troll.

Re:Not a lot of people know this... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3358177)

No no no... wrong. It's actually `exec yes' to go into exec mode. Check your sources dude.

Wow.... (-1, Redundant)

room101 (236520) | more than 12 years ago | (#3358090)

Imagine a Beowulf cluster of these.... oh wait, never mind.

Sorry I just couldn't resist.

Re:Wow.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3358125)

Resist what? Looking like a brainless moron with a pathetically outdated sense of humor?

Well, it looks like you've succeeded admirably. Good job.

compilers? (1)

afidel (530433) | more than 12 years ago | (#3358096)

Are there good optimizing compilers for Fortran95 and the other major research languages for the IA64 yet?

At a lower cost??? (1)

ramdac (302865) | more than 12 years ago | (#3358097)

"Today's announcement shows how HP has worked to help accelerate the shift from proprietary platforms to open architectures, which provide increased scalability, speed and functionality at a lower cost,"

24.5 Million Dollars?... Lower??

Supercomputer(s) (3, Insightful)

totallygeek (263191) | more than 12 years ago | (#3358118)

The problem I have with calling these huge clusters supercomputers is that they really don't seem to fit the mold of the term. I prefer to call them supercomputing networks. When I think of a supercomputer, I am thinking of one entity that is hugely multi-processor or multi-boxed in an enclosure. These systems usually have matrixed processing technology and perform a specialized task for the hardware wrapped around them.

I am impressed, however, with any of these clusters, and am amazed at the cost savings. But, you have other concerns with a huge cluster: redundancy, heat, energy usage, space requirements, etc.

I wonder if there'll be a firesale (1)

the_consumer (547060) | more than 12 years ago | (#3358128)

for the ibm this thing is replacing. it'll only be 6 years old in 2003...

WTF? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3358143)

2002-04-17 06:28:41 HP to build Linux supercomputer (articles,hp) (rejected)

And bets on M$... (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3358150)

Any bets on Microsoft suing HP for using Linux, and/or jacking them on the license fees for Windows that HP is using? "How dare you use Linux in such a public fashion! Pay! Pay! PAY!"

imagine (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3358151)

imagine a beowulf cluster of these

Slashdot is dying (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3358166)

It is now official - a Slashdot poll has confirmed: Slashdot is dying

Yet another crippling bombshell hit the beleaguered Slashdot community when recently a poll on the site confirmed that up-to-date and factually-correct stories account for less than 40 percent of all submitted news stories, that the user-moderation system has fallen to pieces through the oppressive power of the editors, and that subscribers don't need to pay and can use such software as JunkBuster to filter out adverts. Coming on the heels of the latest MSNBC survey which plainly states that Slashdot has lost more readers, this news serves to reinforce what we've known all along. Slashdot is collapsing in complete disarray, as further exemplified by failing dead last [kuro5hin.com] [kuro5hin.com] in the recent Kuro5hin technology site popularity test.

You don't need to be a Kreskin [amdest.com] [amdest.com] to predict Slashdot's future. The hand writing is on the wall: Slashdot faces a bleak future. In fact there won't be any future at all for it because Slashdot is dying. Things are looking very bad for the site. As many of us are already aware, Slashdot continues to lose readers. Red ink flows like a river of blood. The subscribers scheme is the most endangered of them all, having lost 62% of its paying readers.

Let's keep to the facts and look at the numbers.

Slashdot editor Rob Malda (CmdrTaco) states that there are 700 paying subscribers to Slashdot. How many normal readers are there? Let's see. The number of subscriber versus reader posts on Slashdot is roughly in ratio of 1 to 4. Therefore there are about 700*4 = 2800 normal casual readers. Anonymous Coward posts are about half of the volume of the typical posts. Therefore there are about 1400 readers who can't be bothered setting up an account. A recent article put the Trolls, who post sexual insults, foul ASCII art pictures and links to vile sites, at about 80 percent of the Slashdot readership. Therefore there are (700+8400+4200)*4 = 19600 trolling readers. This is consistent with the number of Troll posts.

Due to the troubles of Andover.net, abysmal hit counts and so on, Slashdot went out of business and was taken over by OSDN who run another troubled site. Now OSDN is also dead, its corpse turned over to yet another charnel house.

All major surveys show that Slashdot has steadily declined in readership. It is very sick and its long term survival prospects are very dim. If Slashdot is to survive at all it will be among geeky hobbyist dabblers. Slashdot continues to decay. Nothing short of a miracle could save it at this point in time. For all practical purposes, Slashdot is dead.

So why now? Why did Slashdot fail? Once you get over the myriad of incompatible personalities, particularly among the editors who have repeatedly failed to check for serious inaccuracies in their stories (see the FreeBSD 4.5 "release" as a shocking example), it's clear that subscribers will continue to decrease. Using software such as JunkBuster, readers can eliminate adverts without having to pay any money. These two significant factors, along with the corrupted "moderation" scheme (where editors have infinite power over the regular moderators), only confirm yet further that Slashdot's glory days are coming to an end.

Fact: Slashdot is dying

Bets are up on the uptime! (1)

mastropiero (258677) | more than 12 years ago | (#3358172)

With all that exotic hardware, how do you think it will react?

The guys on kernel dev are going to have to work a good deal to support that. Anyway, I wonder what its average uptime will be.

In Other News... (5, Funny)

Komarosu (538875) | more than 12 years ago | (#3358173)

"8.3 Trillion Floating Point Operations per Second, 1.8 Terabytes of RAM, 170 Terabytes of disk, (including a 53 TB SAN), and 1400 Intel McKinley and Madison Processors."


Microsoft finally release the baseline specifications for there next generation operating system...

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?