Trent Piepho xyzzy at
Wed Sep 24 00:23:50 EDT 2003

On Tue, 23 Sep 2003, Robert G. Brown wrote:
> > 
> > About one order of magnitude slower, and a great deal more cpu time.
> But still pretty much negligible, on a job intended to run all day.

True, but what about interactive tasks?  Say I want to run uptime or netstat
or lilo, or some other simple command on all the nodes of a 100 node cluster. 
Doing it via rsh would take 3 seconds, via ssh 40.  That's a big difference
when you are waiting for the results.

> I suppose in the case of the 65 GB of data you could just NFS export,
> mount, and copy (depending on just how thin the client was).  NFS isn't
> lightning fast, but one can move data through it at a respectable rate

Exactly what I did.  My thin client has a hard drive with a RH9 install, since
I used it to develop the system used on the real thin clients, that only have
a 32MB flash module.

> (less than all day).  And yeah, enabling rsh/rcp long enough to
> facilitate the transfer might be easier/faster.

I tried that first, but rcp barfed on the files larger than 2GB!

Beowulf mailing list, Beowulf at
To change your subscription (digest mode or unsubscribe) visit

More information about the Beowulf mailing list