> >Your experience may vary but I've found SGE and LSF to be superior to all > >versions of PBS that I've ever used. They all will work at the end of the > >day but some packages require more care/feeding and operational overhead > >over time than others. I was always of this opinion until lately I was debating this with IBM for a cluster we are setting up and IBM was pushing for PBSPro... in the end they won the debate because apparently NASA has been pushing a lot of improvements in the last year or so (last time we tried PBS was more than a year ago) and they now run it happily on a 14,000 CPU cluster in production.... I couldn't say much to this, so they won the argument and soon I will have to find out as we will be stressing out a cluster with PBS instead of our favourite (but expensive) LSF... Elia > > > It's probably best that we start into it slowly for now, I don't think we > run enough jobs for that extra performance since the load on our cluster is > pretty low. For instance this month (highest month of usage thus far) we > have run ~400 jobs in our PBS queue, translating into maybe 200 CPU days. > We just don't stress it enough. > > >If you are running OpenPBS instead of at least PBSPro I'd argue > >semi-seriously that you are silly to even be considering HA hardware > >techniques for your cluster :) > > > Let me introduce you to my boss... :) > > -John > > _______________________________________________ > Bioclusters maillist - Bioclusters@bioinformatics.org > https://bioinformatics.org/mailman/listinfo/bioclusters > -- Temasek Life Sciences Laboratory 1, Research Link Singapore 117604 Tel. +65 6874 4945 Fax. +65 6872 7007 -------------------------------------------------------- This mail was sent through Intouch: http://www.techworx.net/