SGI Linux Servers Coming 49
Found in the files of LinuxToday: Computer
Reseller News has an article about SGI being in talks with Linux vendors, hoping
to reach an agreement with one, presumably so they can ship it on their upcoming
server line. The new servers will be for the telco and ISP markets.
As was previously suspected, the company says it will "contribute components" of its
technology to the open source community, including OpenGL. Maybe XFS will
be in there, too. I've heard it's quite nice...
Wish List for SGI (Score:4)
For us to migrate to Linux based SGI boxen we would need the following IRIX features (or equivalent):
IRIX XFS (not the X font Server). Or at least a better non-beta 64 bit journaled file system. We often exceed Linux's max file size.....
IRIX XLV Rock Solid Mirroring, stripping and concatention of hard drives that makes the linux equivalent look like a grad school project. Unfortunately XLV does not do software RAID, and since SGI charges $2,000 to enable the mirroring option, I doubt they will be giving this away soon.
SGI OpenVault This is not really open, but is a slick API for talking to tape libraries.
CRAY DMF Cray Data Migration facility. This is complicated (but slick) software that works with "open"vault to make a tape library look like a bigbut hard drive to the user and all applications. So far we have not found anything similar on Linux.
NFS compatability with IRIX NFS. For some reason (in my experience) SGI-TO-SGI NFS is way-faster than SGI-Linux.
Ability to run SGI/Irix applications (how fast would a R10000 emulator run on a PIII 500?).
The last item will never happen (except for nostalgia in a decade or two) but if LInux had a stable 64bit file system, rock solid mirror/stiping, solid NFS3 (w. locking), and software to interface with tape libraries, perhaps it could actually start competing with the big guys in the file server arena........
Journalled/Logging Filesystem (Score:1)
I'm not sure SGI would want to give Linux a feature which would plug up one of the most complained about features on Linux, fsck times.
--
Wish List for SGI (Score:2)
This may be a "feature" of your PC's bus and ethernet card. Basically the SGI box can send packets to your PC faster than it can generate interrupts to handle them, overrunning the card. There is a section on this in the FreeBSD FAQ and Handbook [freebsd.org]
XFS, maybe. XFS dump, no thanks. (Score:2)
XFS, maybe. XFS dump, no thanks. (Score:1)
I've seen it (xfsrestore) coredump lots of times on dumps with lots of little files. I was moving 20GB of data from one disk array to another, and had to fall back to GNU tar because xfsrestore kept crashing...
-Doug
Workstations (Score:1)
If you don't know [anything], then I can see how that might be pretty boring to you.
U R a Nimrod (Score:1)
Tape is still cheaper than HDs for backup. Not everyone finds it tolerable to buy from Bob's Big Discount Drive Book for el cheapo solutions. Imagine storing sequential changes over the course of a year to 1.2 Terabytes of data. How are HDs cheaper? Storing the damn things alone will be problematic. Best to stick with tape, especially if you want a frozen record of prior changes made to an evolving data set over the course of a certain amount of time (months, years, or even a decade or two).
And for some, "works mostly OK for the most part" simply isn't equivalent to "works right now, for the whole part."
SGI Servers? (Score:1)
Workstations (Score:1)
My guess: working out software support (Score:1)
They roll their own (SGI Servers?) (Score:1)
one good thing about the Merced delays is that SGI have extended their MIPS roadmap
Linux/MIPS porting for older SGIs is not exactly flying along tho'
t
SGI Servers? (Score:1)
/El Niño
Probably no graphics (Score:1)
graphics, but SGI is persuing accelerated graphics
on several fronts.
SGI, along with Red Hat, are funding Precision
Insight to create a Direct Rendering interface,
this is the same kind of interface that SGI uses
on their own boxes, to allow the OpenGL hardware
direct access to a window, without going through
the X server (except to set up the window).
There are rumors of several SGI engineers working
on a volunteer basis to get a Linux that they
can be proud of working on the new Intel boxes
(don't call them NT boxes!) It's hard work, but
remember that almost everybody at SGI is a dyed
in the wool Unix person from way back, and they
have the tools, access, authority, and motivation
to do this.
I've been buying SGI boxes for 12 years, I hope
I will still be able to. By Siggraph (mid
August) we should know what SGI will finally
do. I'm betting that they'll have a screaming
Linux w/graphics implementation by then.
Why "in talks with vendors?" (Score:1)
I WANT WANT WANT!! (Score:1)
They roll their own (SGI Servers?) (Score:1)
Not any more, I don't think. IIRC, they spun off MIPS into its own company and are now building workstations based on x86 processors with SGI-style motherboards and memory architectures.
HP tried embracing Intel and is now having second thoughts. I hope that SGI too has second thoughts before MIPS vanishes.
Not just souped up PCs. (Score:1)
A non-crippled system architecture.
Conventional PC architecture is a series of patches on top of patches, with inefficient communications layouts, backwards-compatible cruft, and lowest-common-denominator busses. A PC motherboard is designed to let a single processor control a host of peripherals of varying ages and kludginess. Memory access is set up for a single processor, and is geared towards slow, inexpensive standards. Things like AGP are kludges on top of this system that try to squeeze extra performance out of them by circumventing some of the architectural bottlenecks.
Workstations, on the other hand, are a different story. They are specifically optimized to allow high bandwidth communications between many processors, lots of memory, and a few peripherals. They can use more-expensive-but-better architectures because they are priced an order of magnitude or two higher than PCs. They are designed to be scalable and to be extremely well optimized for certain classes of task (the type of task depending on the type of workstation).
So, far from getting a "plain" Intel box, you are getting a decent workstation with crappy processors. IMO, SGI should put the MIPS chips back in.
This I gotta see (Score:1)
Or was that a troll? If so, I bit.
--
mmmmm....linux. (Score:1)
opening the large boc of primo components...putting it together, booting up, and witnessing the fastest computer i've ever used crash under windows nt. a sad, sad day.
now if only someone could loan (read: _give_) me $25,000 for a wonderful (linux) SGI workstation. one can only dream, or rob a bank.
SGI Servers? ahem...graphics workstations (Score:1)
for a complete list of hardware and components: http://www.sgi.com
brief overview:
1-4 Pentium II or III chips.
Proprietary memory bus and chipsets, etc. i think that for any other information, the aforementioned website should give you enough information to fill your little heart with awe...
Kentucky Fried Computing (Score:1)
Thing is, it mostly reminds me of KFC. Ever noticed how they never mention what KFC stands for anymore? That's cause people got health conscious, and Kentucky Fried Chicken didn't sound so good anymore.
Silicon Graphics, Inc doesn't sound so good if you're gonna pitch a server solution to a pointy-haired boss...
--
SGI Servers? -- not Intel (Score:2)
If they port XFS, that will be REALLY, REALLY cool. XFS has all kinds of neato stuff like journaling (for super-fast fscks) and they also have this thing called GRIO (Guaranteed Rate I/O) where you can allocate a channel to a filesystem that's guaranteed to produce N MB/s... really nice for streaming apps. If SGI can make the transition to Linux across teh board, think of how many resources they could allocate to supporting Linux instead of IRIX... Mmmmm...
-nate
XFS, maybe. XFS dump, no thanks. (Score:1)
I just went through two consecutive xfsrestore nighmares where it appeared that xfsdump had worked properly, but xfsrestore could not read the backup tape in one case, and only found some of the files in annother case.
To their credit, SGI's tech support worked *very* hard with us to recover the data. But we never got it back.
Probably *will* have graphics (Score:1)
The servers will have graphics (probably not accelerated 3D) since they will be designed to run both Linux and Micro$oft Windoze NT. A headless server would be a more reasonable option if NT wasn't part of the plan.
check out the press release [sgi.com]
I hope the server is rackmountable, takes up 4U or less and has an LCDproc [omnipotent.net] compatible display, especially if it's targeted at ISPs.
SGI Servers? (Score:1)
Probably no graphics (Score:1)
Any opinions?
This I gotta see (Score:2)