Hi Jim, > Possibly killed, (possibly run out of /tmp space or disk space in > general, benign DOS attack, etc.), and it depends on what kind of risk > you are willing to take with your clients data while the batch process > is sharing the machine with them and vice versa. Which risk? > way, who in your group is willing to have a batch process run the > background on their systems idle cycles while they are working on their > own projects? Most people are willing. I mean, "working on our projects" has two components: 1. type code, papers, emails, ...; compile code; test-run small code; simple data analysis or visualization (more, less, gnuplot, xmgrace, ...); netscape. 2. run (longer) code. Usually, we run type-1 jobs on our local machines and submit type-2 jobs to the queue. While reading your (and typing this) email, there is a job running in the background on my machine. Do yu think that is not safe? What could be the problems? > If you have racks of unused old Sun's and SGI's and want > to make a new cluster without clients I think this is a different > problem. Well, we also have those piles of old machines, but my question is the opposite. We have dozens of above-750 MHz P3s that are "abused" as typewriters for code, papers, emails, ..., and one option would be to upgrade their RAM and use them as a small network of workstations. An alternative opion is to build a small, say, 16-node beowulf cluster (with one master and 15 slave nodes and a simple 10/100 ethernet connection and a 16-port switch) with Mosix (or whatever) installed. My question is: what would be the advantage of having the beowulf cluster? Ivo