An Interesting Boot Log On Alpha 244
Here is an interesting Boot log on an Alpha. What is so interesting about this boot log? Nothing special, just that this Alpha's got 31 Processors, 256GB RAM -- looks VERY impressive. I wouldn't mind having one of those beasts at work *drooling all over*. Oh, and it compiles the kernel very fast :)
CPlant is not this new 12,000 EV68 machine. (Score:2)
But its definately not the same system as the new 12,000 cpu 30 TeraOp ASCI EV68-based dream machine.
Now what would be _cool_ is if during checkout someone were to try out 2.4.0-test103 and find out that it actually outperforms Tru64 for certain classes of problems.
The reference to 2.4.0-test103 is based on the rate of test kernels, and the projected delivery time of this new machine. I hope that 2.4.0 final is available much sooner than that.
I said that (Score:2)
Sad, just sad. (Score:1)
Oh, well.
Digital logo (Score:1)
Why would you want to run Linux on this? (Score:2)
But but but... (Score:1)
I got the bootlog by email a three weeks ago and had to stay seated for half an hour.
Of course geeks lust after cool hardware, just like car guys lust after cool cars.
:-) My question is why aren't you drooling? Are you some sorta software nancy boy or something?
Need some sort of notification system.... (Score:1)
Enigma
Re:You mean that's it? (Score:1)
oh wait... that doesn't look right...
Re:You mean that's it? (Score:1)
Please, let's not draw irrelevant political comparisons; I think this one is, not because you fail to make a point with it, but because it simplifies the British political situation.
and now we can run E! (Score:1)
Add also... (Score:1)
Re:What happened today?? (Score:1)
Would we notice if they were kidnapped? Of course we would! The stories would get better!
Re:My question is... (Score:1)
"The only caveats are that one of the CPUs was out of
the system at the time (hence 31 CPUs, not 32)"
Re:Forget the CPUs, look at the IO! (Score:1)
I bet my keyboard is better than theirs, at least I have that.
Re:Why would you want to run Linux on this? (Score:2)
Re:actually (Score:1)
ACHTUNG! ALLES LOOKENSPEEPERS! (Score:3)
Das computermachine ist nicht fuer gefingerpoken und mittengrabben.
Ist easy schnappen der springenwerk, blowenfusen und poppencorken mit spitzensparken.
Ist nicht fuer gewerken bei das dumpkopfen.
Das rubbernecken sichtseeren keepen das cotten-pickenen hans in das pockets muss; relaxen und watchen das blinkenlichten.
Oh, wait, front panels went out in the 70's. nevermind.
Re:Scalability (Score:2)
Re:Did I miss something? (Score:1)
Compare this to the "Highest Intel BogoMIPS" (Score:1)
Ok, I finally tracked down [compaq.com] the Alpha pricing. But I'll be danged if I can get it to work. Can someone else? yeeshk.
Linux == WOCE (Write Once, Compile Everywhere) (Score:1)
I'm working on an open source project, and porting to anything beyond *Linux (i.e. AlphaLinux, IntelLinux, etc.) is a pain in the ass. Header files aren't where you think they are, they don't necessarily do what you think they do, standard library routines don't do what you think they do (try getcwd(NULL, 0) on a solaris) or what they're supposed to do, etc.
When companies like Oracle employ teams of porting engineers and have to substantially modify their coding practices (last time I read them, the Oracle coding standards were over 100 pages) to support the plethora of operating systems they have to support, you start to see the advantage of having one unified platform. One of the reasons why corporate developers have flocked to Java in droves was the original goal of Write Once, Run Everywhere.
While there are specific hardware differences between platforms that porters should be aware of (Alignment is the most significant and obvious), being able to have the same operating system on many different platforms gives developers more of an advantage to writing to that platform. And it makes more esoteric hardware more attractive (becuase they get to exploit all the different applications ported to that platform).
Overall, the more things that Linux runs (and runs well) on, the better it is for applications developers to support the Linux development model and encourage customers to run it.
The solution isn't to just say "Tru64 is better, run it" but to say "Linux needs work, here's the help," which appears to be what Compaq/DEC is doing here.
Re:Proof of Linux' scalability... (Score:3)
Nope, the S/390 port runs either in a VM or natively. You can boot up a 390 with Linux as your only OS, and then it definitely knows about the whole machine.
It's just that far more people are likely to have access to a VM running on a 390 than there are that have a whole 390 to play with.
No, no, no. It ain't ME babe,
It ain't ME you're looking for.
Re:Scalability (Score:3)
As taken from yet another Kernel Traffic [linuxcare.com] Post:
Re:2.4.xx scales well (Score:2)
Re:When I was yer age... (Score:3)
Re:Just why does this matter (Score:1)
we do not condone the actions being condoned by the condoners condoning the condoned actions.
"sex on tv is bad, you might fall off..."
Re:Swap rules for Linux not the same as other Unix (Score:1)
Re:ping sundown2.zk3.dec.com = host lookup failed. (Score:1)
-Mr. Macx
Moof!
******
Great! (Score:1)
Re:proc/sys/net/ipv4/ip_always_defrag is missing (Score:1)
---
dd if=/dev/random of=~/.ssh/authorized_keys bs=1 count=1024
Uhhhh... (Score:2)
Now which processor is doing that? Is it the RAM strips? Oh wait.... it's the modules...
Ok, I don't mean to troll, but if I want to show-off my machine, I'd like to fix those little warnings first before sending the dmesg.
---
dd if=/dev/random of=~/.ssh/authorized_keys bs=1 count=1024
Re:Right on. (Score:1)
I'm glad I'm not the only one. :)
Re:Its Bender looking for pron :) (Score:1)
Re:A Canadian computer I see, eh? (Score:1)
J
Proof of Linux' scalability... (Score:2)
While I'll admit that the S/390 port is some proof of scalability- every little drop helps dispell myths.
Re:Losing proposition. (Score:1)
I personally find the memory cooler. Why not start up the OS, mount / to a 10-100gb ramdisk, copy the harddisk to the ramdisk, and then finish loading up. *that* would be true speed.
Re:I said that (Score:1)
I keep seeing Hitler's revenges driving around town (erm, VW Beetles, for those not in the know).
So "not going away" doesn't mean anything.
If I thought Alphas were any good I'd have bought one. Oh, I did. And it was. And it still is.
For mathematical computing it is the easiest to program in efficient C of any architecture I know. My C code trounces hand-optimised assembly on an equal speed Athlon, despite the fact that my instruction latencies are, on paper, longer.
FatPhil
Re:I could use all 31! (Score:1)
Re:Short bogoMIPS reference - Re:How many BogoMIPS (Score:1)
Now if only Linux could use more than 2-4 CPUs... (Score:1)
I'd sooner run Solaris or Digital Unix on their native hardware - at least that way, all that power will be put to use! Linux just doesn't scale well beyond the workstation market yet.
While this is cool, I'm sorry - Linux isn't quite "up there" yet. Show me some hardcore applications that use this (nevermind Linux itself) under Linux...
who cares (Score:1)
Re:I said that (Score:2)
On top of that, you can get a not-so-completely-new Alpha for a LOT cheaper.
About 2 years ago there were AlphaStation 200 4/233 carcases going on one of the online auctions for under US$400. Go to a computer trade show and pick up a 6.4GB HD (the max an AS200 would support), 64MB additional RAM, 24X CD-ROM, Keyboard, mouse, 21" monitor, 56K/v.90 modem, and you're still under US$1000.
Code commentary is like sex.
If it's good, it's VERY good.
Re:Did I miss something? (Score:2)
Damn, what a difference. 8 hours (or 10 in your case) versus 20 seconds. Shit, you wouldn't even have time to go get a cup of coffee anymnre. Used to be you had time for a beach trip.
Down with enhanced productivity!
Oh, just occurred to me -- the kernel I was compiling was in the
This machine is so fast... (Score:4)
(and execute an infinite loop in less than 3.5 minutes)
My boot log has one thing in common... (Score:5)
ttyS00 at 0x03f8 (irq = 4) is a 16550A
All I need is another 255.8725 GB, another 29 processors, another 7 LAN cards, and I'm right there!
Re:Scalability (Score:2)
It depends upon the task being performed of course. Some tasks can never be parallelized at all, regardless of how many CPUs you have and what operating system you are running.
Sure, but assume a task that is 100% parallelized for the purpose of the question. What is the OS overhead as you increase processors?
--
Re:Right on. (Score:3)
1990: You could easily read everything in comp.*. You bitched about all the weenies clogging up the alt hierarchy.
1995: You could easily read everything in comp.lang.perl. You bitched about all the weenies clogging up the comp.* hierarchy.
1998: You could easily read everything on slashdot. You bitched about all the weenies clogging up Usenet.
July 2000: You could easily read everything on kuro5hin [kuro5hin.org]. You bitched about all the weenies clogging up slashdot.
September 2000: Bloody weenies clog up kuro5hin. End of universe as we know it. Film at eleven.
A Canadian computer I see, eh? (Score:2)
aboot: switching to OSF/1 PALcode version 1.75
aboot: booting from device 'SCSI 3 6 0 1 100 0 0'
This joke was aboot as funny as Canada's military presence, eh?
Losing proposition. (Score:2)
Chipset? (Score:2)
SuperID
Re:Imagine 375 GS320s running Tru64 UNIX. (Score:2)
Behold it. Touch it. Lick it. (Score:5)
I was left alone to work my mojo on a much smaller Sun server, but once I was good and certain i was alone, and that there were no cameras monitoring me, I wandered over to the supercomputer. I looked at the gray and blue tower that held the processors and RAM. It was worth $20, easy.
I touched it, caressed the cool metal of the mesh grid over the airvents with my fingertips, feeling the warm air and the low buzz. I'd pay $100 to do that again.
Then I licked it.
Priceless.
SoupIsGood Food
Re:Scalability (Score:2)
This is a hardware, not an OS issue. And sure enough, Alpha (like Pentia) has an atomic test-and-set instruction! Good thing, too -- you need this sort of instruction to implement mutexes and other locks both in kernel and user space. There is no efficient software workaround for the lack of such an instruction.
Re:Proof of Linux' scalability... (Score:4)
Re:Enough speed for Windows 2000? (Score:2)
Um, dude, Microsoft doesn't run on alpha any more.
Oh yeah, just another way that Microsoft products suck.
Powerful (Score:3)
--
Chief Frog Inspector
Re:Need some sort of notification system.... (Score:2)
They said that their machines could handle it easily...
Re:I said that (Score:2)
What WOULD be a commitment then?
FWIW, I work at API and we make Alpha's too and I have to say that it's getting damned frustrating listening to the FUD from IA-64 lovers, none of which have even touched an IA-64, no mind can AFFORD an IA-64. (You can get a new Alpha for under $3k)
How many BogoMIPS? (Score:2)
I would find it unremarkable if there was some Intel chip that had an outrageously higher BogoMIPS rating that would disappear from the "running" as soon as you tossed POVRay onto it...
Re:slow news day? (Score:2)
Is this a breakthrough technology? No. Is this an earth-shaking legal or political development? No. Is it something that geeks the world over will have wet dreams about tonight? You bet your ass.
When I was yer age... (Score:5)
All the posts about "I need a towel" and "they should sell tickets just to touch it" are gonna look funny when this is just another slag heap of unusable parts.
"Why, when I was yer age, miboy, we had to put up with using a computer. That's a complicated physically connected brick of processing components. We thought a mere 2^5 processors was worth drooling over. Yes, miboy, I know your cochlear implant has more than that. You're missing the point. This thing was tremendous! It took up a whole rack: four times the size of a grown man! And all of its memory circuits were in the same cabinet, requiring massive cooling apparatus, unlike the distributed memory crystals that people embed in their jewelry."
Anyone still drooling over 2^5 address space on ferrite core memory? Anyone still drooling over 2^5 address lines? Or data lines?
Windows 2000? (Score:2)
Re:Big Deal! (Score:2)
Read some news! IBM, Compaq, Dell and the other guys are WORKING on making 16 processors and 32 processors based server - it's still vaporware!
Also, do you mind showing me a X86 machine which supports 256GB RAM? huh?
Thought so!
Re:My boot log has one thing in common... (Score:4)
It would be nice to do a rebel linux install on our Sun Enterprise 10ks (we have quite a few). Only trouble would be disguising what was going on :
You don't need to see my bootlog (waves hand).
These aren't the cpus you're looking for (waves hand)
You can go about your business (waves hand)
Move along.
Re:I said that (Score:2)
I wish Compaq would commit to keeping the line running, at least for a few years.
And so on. I don't know how these things start, but folks, Alpha is not going away. Sheesh.
The point (Score:3)
-
Re:Scalability (Score:3)
It depends upon the task being performed of course. Some tasks can never be parallelized at all, regardless of how many CPUs you have and what operating system you are running.
> Did they every sort out the issues that prevented kernel socket (or was it I/O?) APIs
> being called concurrently by processes on multiple CPUs?
Yes, Linux TCP/IP is fully threaded and will run concurrently on all CPUs, assuming that there is work to be done on all of them. (a single socket will not run on 100 CPUs at the same time, for instance)
Not Scalable (Score:2)
I could use all 31! (Score:4)
Numbers 16 to 20 would do Seti.
Numbers 21-29 would run Quake3, Civ:CTP, and XWS.
Numbers 30 and 31 would run the realtime disk encryption/decryption series
Re:Did I miss something? (Score:2)
I wonder how long kernel compiles actually take?
So who was it said... (Score:2)
Re:Scalability (Score:3)
Re:Scalability (Score:2)
HEY! (Score:2)
so (Score:2)
"tweaked" startup text (Score:2)
Computing speed is relative. You can buy a faster computer, or make your mind go slower. Bring out the beer!
2.4.xx scales well (Score:2)
Re:Not so imp...what?? (Score:3)
Imagine a beowulf cluster of C64s! Think of the power!
What happened today?? (Score:2)
1) This is one heck of a boring day with nothing happening at all.
2) HeUnique just received the rights to post and wanted to post something, anything quickly before those rights faded away.
3) Someone evil took controle of
4) I was really bored at work and decided to reply to that headline even if it didn't hold much interests.
"When I was a little kid my mother told me not to stare into the sun...
Enough speed for Windows 2000? (Score:2)
Quoted from article:
Oh, and it compiles the kernel VERY fastGood. Maybe it'll be fast enough to start up Windows 2000 in a reasonable time frame.
<grin> Think of how much *ass* you could kick running SETI@home on that!
Okay. It boots. (Score:3)
imo, what it can do well is less important than what it can't. To paraphrase Limp Bizkit, "Let's break some sh**."
Re:Why would you want to run Linux on this? (Score:2)
oh GOD! (Score:5)
Re:Did I miss something? (Score:2)
At a guess, not very long at all. On a 24 CPU Sun Starfire machine, a kernel compile takes a shade over 20 seconds. See http://linuxcare.com.au/anton/e10000/ for details. I'd guess this Alpha will be comparable to that, if not faster. As an interesting datapoint, my first kernel compile took over 10 hours (that was 0.99pl8+ on a 386). [linuxcare.com.au]
Obligatory beowolf comment (Score:2)
Scalability (Score:4)
Can anyone comment on the SMP performance linearity of the current Linux kernel on more than 4 CPUs? Did they every sort out the issues that prevented kernel socket (or was it I/O?) APIs being called concurrently by processes on multiple CPUs?
Re:Big Deal! (Score:2)
Indeed, but other (more competent :-) companies are already
there, even with Intel CPUs. The Data General
AV25000 [dg.com], for example,
supports up to 64 PIII Xeon CPUs, and runs either DG/UX or Windows (or both). Of course, the
if you go the Windows route, you'll have to run multiple copies simultaneously, because Windows can only
scale to 4 CPUs on that machine. If you go the more sensible DG/UX route, of course,
it can use all 64 CPUs from a single system image :-)
Not so imp...what?? (Score:4)
Calibrating delay loop... 1488.98 BogoMIPS
Feh, I thought, either Alpha's REALLY suck or (more likely) there's a bug there. Then I took a closer look:
SMP starting up secondaries.
Calibrating delay loop... 1493.17 BogoMIPS
Calibrating delay loop... 1493.17 BogoMIPS
Calibrating delay loop... 1493.17 BogoMIPS
Calibrating delay loop... 1488.98 BogoMIPS
Calibrating delay loop... 1488.98 BogoMIPS
Calibrating delay loop... 1488.98 BogoMIPS
Calibrating delay loop... 1488.98 BogoMIPS
Calibrating delay loop... 1488.98 BogoMIPS
Calibrating delay loop... 1488.98 BogoMIPS
Calibrating delay loop... 1488.98 BogoMIPS
Calibrating delay loop... 1488.98 BogoMIPS
Calibrating delay loop... 1488.98 BogoMIPS
Calibrating delay loop... 1488.98 BogoMIPS
Calibrating delay loop... 1488.98 BogoMIPS
Calibrating delay loop... 1488.98 BogoMIPS
Calibrating delay loop... 1488.98 BogoMIPS
Calibrating delay loop... 1488.98 BogoMIPS
Calibrating delay loop... 1488.98 BogoMIPS
Calibrating delay loop... 1488.98 BogoMIPS
Calibrating delay loop... 1488.98 BogoMIPS
Calibrating delay loop... 1488.98 BogoMIPS
Calibrating delay loop... 1488.98 BogoMIPS
Calibrating delay loop... 1488.98 BogoMIPS
Calibrating delay loop... 1488.98 BogoMIPS
Calibrating delay loop... 1488.98 BogoMIPS
Calibrating delay loop... 1488.98 BogoMIPS
Calibrating delay loop... 1488.98 BogoMIPS
Calibrating delay loop... 1488.98 BogoMIPS
Calibrating delay loop... 1488.98 BogoMIPS
Calibrating delay loop... 1488.98 BogoMIPS
SMP: Total of 31 processors activated (46170.90 BogoMIPS).
Oh.
--
Imagine 375 GS320s running Tru64 UNIX. (Score:5)
Re:How many BogoMIPS? (Score:2)
I bet one could design a chip that was 100 times slower than your PII-450, but had a bogomips rating of 10,000.
It's a calibrated delay.. that's all.. how fast the computer can do nothing, basically. Rather meaningless as far as speed goes.
Re:Just why does this matter (Score:3)
For the record, I don't think the linked page is a brag. I think it's notes to interested parties who are working on porting the Linux kernel to large multi-processor machines. The reason it got on
Processor 7 is down. (Score:2)
Re:Proof of Linux' scalability... (Score:2)
Until you can show a real-world benchmark for each step along the way from 1 -> 31 processors, I won't believe it will scale well. Something simple like building kernel would likely be graphable and show how well things scale. I'd build it once to preload the cache and then build it 10 times in a row, take the average, add a cpu and repeat.
I'm not saying that Linux doesn't scale. I'm also not saying that it does. I'm saying the mere fact that it booted on a 31 CPU machine means that it booted on a 31 processor machine and nothing more until more data is provided.
Re:Did I miss something? (Score:5)
Steven E. Ehrbar
Re:One Question (Score:2)
The same way that script kiddies do :-)
You mean that's it? (Score:4)
There is an aristocracy on slashdot; make no mistake about it. When people like drendite [slashdot.org] (userid=#3) speak [slashdot.org], people bow down in worship [slashdot.org], simply because of his low userid. It doesn't matter whether one actually makes a true contribution to society; what matters is the aristocratic entitlement conferred by longstanding existence (not participation).
Take the British Parliament, for example. Though Britain still hasn't come close to providing universal healthcare or proper dentistry they sorely need, they have finally seen the folly of maintaining a ruling aristocracy, and have eliminated the hereditary seats in the House of Lords. Slashdot should follow their lead.
The solution is not to take away the voice of people with low userids. Nor is the solution to eliminate the +1 bonus, because it serves a legitimate purpose and is democratically attainable by all, from the oldest poster to the neophyte with a five-figure userid. The solution is to eliminate the tagging of comments with the userid of their posters.
The userid tag does nothing to help the community, and does much to harm it, by encouraging wishywashy moderators to inflate the karma of oldtimers and penalize the newguys who express controversial opinions. (When moderators waver between slamming a post or modding it up, they usually defer to the userid in addressing its seriousness and authority. This is unacceptable.)
If you're worried about fraud and impersonation, then you already have an effective means of distinguishing between posts: the signature. The
Effective policing (moderating) can only go so far. We must correct these social ills by striking at their sources -- their causes -- not merely at their symptoms. Join with me in tearing down the illegitimate reign of the slashdot aristocracy and their petty notions of insight and imformativeness, and lift up a glorious new tomorrow, where everyone, democratically, no matter what the tld of his email address or the number of his userid, shares in the same promise of opportunity for reasoned argument and receptive audience.
Thank you for your time.
Froid
Re:What happened today?? (Score:2)
Thanks! And there is still a winner... (Score:2)
And I'm quite aware that BogoMIPS are an even more Meaningless Indicator of Processing Speed than the indicators that people try to take seriously... It is of practical value, but only in predicting the performance of timing loops...
Loving the wildfire (Score:4)
I work at DEC^H^H^HCompaq. We have one of these bad-boys in a lab, and I have to walk by it a lot. It's this fairly massive thing, the size of 3 or 4 fridges all in a row. They're bluish, and the heart of the beast is identifiable by the LED display that sits at about eye height, saying things like:
AlphaServer GS320
16 processors configured
And so on. I adore it. And every once in a while, when nobody's looking..
I give it a hug.
Once, I was talking to a co-worker about it.
"You know the Wildfire in the lab?" I asked.
"The what now?" he replied. So I told him about the Wildfire. Later that day, we were walking through the lab, past it.
He gave it a hug.
If anyone else wants to send the wildfire a hug, let me know.
Jesus H. Christ in a chicken basket! (Score:4)
I'd be first in line