Rankings dominated by linux
|
| Author | Content |
|---|---|
| herzeleid Nov 13, 2007 6:33 PM EDT |
How interesting that linux systems account for 86% of the top 500 supercomputers. Who saw that coming 15 years ago? Am I the only one? |
| jezuch Nov 14, 2007 3:30 AM EDT |
Has someone had the patience to dig in and find the first Linux-powered supercomputer on this list?... |
| Sander_Marechal Nov 14, 2007 4:27 AM EDT |
Quoting:Has someone had the patience to dig in and find the first Linux-powered supercomputer on this list?... That's easy. The #1 and #2 position BlueGene/L and BlueGene/P runs Linux on the IO nodes (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blue_Gene#Architecture) and a special, custom OS on top. The #3 SGI Altrix runs Linux everywhere: http://www.nas.nasa.gov/Resources/Systems/columbia.html |
| hkwint Nov 14, 2007 4:54 AM EDT |
The new (announced) 1 Pflop Roadrunner featuring both Cell- and AMD processors is also going to use (RedHat) Linux, according to WP. That means, if nothing unexpected happens, the _first_ petaflop supercomputer on the planet will run Linux! See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM_Roadrunner Quoting:Who saw that coming 15 years ago? Hmm, let me think... In 1992 I was eight years old playing on the C64 and Linux was before version 1.0, and it would still take five years ore so before I would hear about Linux for the first time in my life, so I believe I didn't see it coming. |
| Abe Nov 14, 2007 6:16 AM EDT |
One think about the list that I really dislike is not revealing the OS each of the systems runs. It shouldn't be difficult to tell, but does any one have an idea why they don't? I guess my question is, does any one see any trace of Windows in the list? I didn't see any. |
| richo123 Nov 14, 2007 9:13 AM EDT |
Hate to be a big head but I saw this coming 10 years ago. Supercomputers have a long history of unix usage dating back to the 1970s. Clusters could be seen in the mid 1990s as the cheapest way forward with supercomputers (shared memory never left the blocks commercially). Thus a cheap OS for each node was essential. Finally no supercomputer needs any desktop attributes. Obviously linux was (and is) the only cost effective solution. Particularly after the 2.6 kernel evened up performance relative to other commercial unices. |
| herzeleid Nov 14, 2007 9:47 AM EDT |
Quoting:I guess my question is, does any one see any trace of Windows in the list? I didn't see any.There's a few windoze "compute clusters", way way down on the list, and of no consequence, basically curiosities. |
| tuxchick Nov 14, 2007 10:02 AM EDT |
herzeleid, and they require a separate licensing server cluster just to calculate all the various windoze licenses that are needed. |
| herzeleid Nov 14, 2007 10:21 AM EDT |
Quoting: they require a separate licensing server cluster just to calculate all the various windoze licenses that are needed.Haha, I think you've pinpointed it - the whole reason for the windoze compute cluster is to compute it's own licensing costs! Rather in line with the circular reasoning of the whole self-perpetuating microsoft ecosystem. |
| richo123 Nov 14, 2007 10:28 AM EDT |
Evolution is a good model for OS spread and decline. The windoze dinosaur is approaching extinction. Such events appear first in certain demanding habitats (supercomputers). |
| tracyanne Nov 14, 2007 12:26 PM EDT |
Quoting:Evolution is a good model for OS spread and decline. The windoze dinosaur is approaching extinction. Such events appear first in certain demanding habitats (supercomputers). Actually the demise of the Dinosaurs was caused by a catastrophic event - a meteorite hitting the earth. In other words the Dinosaurs and a great deal of other flora and fauna were first forced into extinction, thus creating niches into which mammals and the flora an fauna we know today could evolve. I'm not sure we've have the equivalent of such a meteorite impact in the computer OS world. |
| Sander_Marechal Nov 14, 2007 1:18 PM EDT |
Quoting:I'm not sure we've have the equivalent of such a meteorite impact in the computer OS world. A massive, nigh unstoppable virus that takes out 95% of the Windows boxes? :-) |
| techiem2 Nov 14, 2007 1:19 PM EDT |
Quoting:A massive, nigh unstoppable virus that takes out 95% of the Windows boxes? :-) Isn't that Windows itself? |
| jezuch Nov 14, 2007 2:49 PM EDT |
Sander, I was thinking in historical terms - when for the first time a Linux-powered computer appeared there :) |
| Sander_Marechal Nov 14, 2007 3:19 PM EDT |
@jezuch: But that's not a correct analogy. Mammals existed in the time of the dinosaurs. It's just that the existence of the dinosaurs kept them from being dominant. Pretty much like our situation where the 800 pound gorilla that is Microsoft is keeping Linux from being the dominant OS. If something like a killer Windows virus acting as our "meteorite" suddenly wiped the majority of Windows boxes then Linux would suddenly become the dominant OS. So, any of you have experience writing Windows viruses? ;-) |
| herzeleid Nov 14, 2007 3:29 PM EDT |
OK, here's the historical data: First appearance of linux on the list was in June 1998 with one lone entry: OS (count) ------------------ Solaris (111) UNICOS (107) IRIX (93) AIX (75) HP-UX (25) EWS-UX/V (22) HI-UX/MPP (10) Digital Unix (7) OSF/1 (7) VOS3/HAP/ES (6) CMOST (4) Super-UX (3) Paragon OS (1) Linux (1) Compare to today: OS (Count) ------------------- linux (426) other unix (34) mixed (34) windoze (6) Source: http://www.top500.org |
| montezuma Nov 15, 2007 4:27 AM EDT |
Also noteworthy in those statistics is that 10 years ago the median number of processors in a supercomputer was roughly 25. Today it is 1500. |
| Bob_Robertson Nov 15, 2007 5:14 AM EDT |
> So, any of you have experience writing Windows viruses? ;-) I would never advocate, nor take action to cause, such acts that would be destructive to other people's property. That doesn't mean I wouldn't point and laugh with glee if it were to happen without me. |
| hkwint Nov 15, 2007 2:09 PM EDT |
Quoting:> So, any of you have experience writing Windows viruses? ;-) Writing Windows virusses is sóóóóó twentieth century! Just buy a complete kit with WebGUI from someone in Russia or Romania. You only have to alter some parameters. I know at least one successful Windows-virus which was created whis way (and the non-technical guy using the toolkit received an ICT job at a municipality!) Quoting:Actually the demise of the Dinosaurs was caused by a catastrophic event - a meteorite hitting the earth. Catastrophic is related to the viewpoint of the dino's, so in the terms of the analogy catastrophic should be from the viewpoint of Microsoft. The most likely catastrophe from the Windows-viewpoint is that Bill Gates and Steve Ballmer find out Linux is easier to use and require less time in maintenance. Or they simply loose their secret source code, after which all is lost (they don't keep a backup around in every country in the world like Linus does, do they?) Quoting:Also noteworthy in those statistics is that 10 years ago the median number of processors in a supercomputer was roughly 25. Today it is 1500. The number one uses over 200k processors, how much Microsoft licenses would that take? |
| montezuma Nov 15, 2007 5:48 PM EDT |
> Actually the demise of the Dinosaurs was caused by a catastrophic event - a meteorite hitting the earth. There is actually a lot of debate on that point. Many paleontologists believe that the meteorite/catastrophe was just the final straw for a group already tottering on the edge of obsolescence. |
| tracyanne Nov 15, 2007 6:19 PM EDT |
Quoting:Many paleontologists believe that the meteorite/catastrophe was just the final straw for a group already tottering on the edge of obsolescence. That's what makes science so exciting, because there are just as many who believe the evidence is that the dinosaurs were flourishing. |
| Sander_Marechal Nov 15, 2007 10:28 PM EDT |
Quoting:Many paleontologists believe that the meteorite/catastrophe was just the final straw for a group already tottering on the edge of obsolescence. Well, even that debate fits nicely into our analogy, doesn't it :-) Some people are already thinking MS is becoming obsolete and that it's just a matter of time, while other's believe MS is flourishing and needs a hand to be pushed off the cliff. |
| montezuma Nov 16, 2007 6:21 AM EDT |
Yeah Sander good point. Hypotheses are formed (in science and the market) in the absence of complete evidence. The market differs from science in that there is a potential feedback loop absent from science. Thus if lots of people start believing M$ is a dinosaur heading for extinction then the prophecy may become self fulfilling.... |
| Sander_Marechal Nov 16, 2007 7:12 AM EDT |
That can happen in the real life too montezuma. If we all start believing than mankind is doomed, all hell will break loose and you'd see mayhem that will indeed doom mankind :-) |
| jdixon Nov 16, 2007 10:20 AM EDT |
> Am I the only one? 15 years ago. Probably pretty much so, yes. Now, even 10 years ago, it was becoming obvious to anyone who took the time to look into it. > The market differs from science in that there is a potential feedback loop absent from science. The feedback loop in science is supposed to be experimentation confirming hypotheses with independent testing and verification. Now that we've entered an age where science seems to be mostly funded by governments that's getting replaced by meeting political goals and furthering political causes. Which was, of course, easily predictable. Governments subvert everything they touch to their purposes. It's the nature of the beast. |
| montezuma Nov 16, 2007 10:55 AM EDT |
> Now that we've entered an age where science seems to be mostly funded by governments that's getting replaced by meeting political goals and furthering political causes. It's only the uses made of scientific research that suffer from this problem and this problem is as old as science itself. Political manipulation of scientific evidence has occurred since Galileo: Remember the Catholic Church and its attempt to silence him? Most legitimate scientists believe there is an objective reality out there and IN THE LONG TERM severely punish falsehood and spin through the independent testing of ideas. There is actually a very strong incentive for them to do so since if a prevailing orthodoxy is taken down with hard evidence or a lie exposed then huge browny points accrue to those who do it. As to Governments "subverting everything they touch" well your ideological bias appears to be showing ;-). |
| Bob_Robertson Nov 16, 2007 11:19 AM EDT |
> As to Governments "subverting everything they touch" well your ideological bias appears to be showing ;-). Bias? BIAS? Ha! It's fact, I tell you. FACT! Argh! The inefficiencies of central planning extend to _all_ of human action. :^) |
| tracyanne Nov 16, 2007 12:59 PM EDT |
Quoting:Most legitimate scientists believe there is an objective reality out there and IN THE LONG TERM severely punish falsehood and spin through the independent testing of ideas. No most all. Quoting:There is actually a very strong incentive for them to do so since if a prevailing orthodoxy is taken down with hard evidence or a lie exposed then huge browny points accrue to those who do it. FOSS works a lot like that. |
| montezuma Nov 16, 2007 1:02 PM EDT |
> FOSS works a lot like that. Yeah I know. That's why it is so successful and why it will eventually displace closed efforts. |
| Bob_Robertson Nov 16, 2007 1:44 PM EDT |
http://www.mises.org/th/chapter16.asp
"To maintain that the evolution of mankind from its original conditions to the present state followed a definite line is to distort historical fact. There was neither uniformity nor continuity in the succession of historical events. It is still less permissible to apply to historical changes the terms growth and decay, progress and retrogression, improvement and deterioration if the historian or philosopher does not arbitrarily pretend to know what the end of human endeavor ought to be. There is no agreement among people on a standard by which the achievements of civilization can be said to be good or bad, better or worse." Or to put it in two short phrases: "Two steps forward, one step back." and "He knows changes aren't permanent, but change is." {insert blasting bass guitar riff and exquisite drumming here} |
| jdixon Nov 16, 2007 5:18 PM EDT |
> ...well your ideological bias appears to be showing ;-). I certainly hope so. I seldom make any attempt to hide it, and when I do it's almost always due to lack of time or politeness. However, I notice you don't refute the assertion. :) I should also note that subverting something to another purpose is, in and of itself, neither a good nor bad thing. Whether it is good or bad depends entirely on your view of the original vs. the new purpose. |
| montezuma Nov 16, 2007 6:33 PM EDT |
> However, I notice you don't refute the assertion. :) That's because I was being polite. |
| Bob_Robertson Nov 17, 2007 5:24 AM EDT |
> That's because I was being polite. Although some folks might be surprised I would say this, it is possible to disagree, refute the other person's assertions, and remain polite. I, also, tend not to do so because it takes too long. Here's how it goes: "I disagree. Governments have fostered many positive aspects of development, such as creating the non-profit research environment that was the early Internet, the basic research that underlies teh NASA projects, and you cannot deny that it was Isabella of Spain, acting as the head of government, that funded Columbus's voyages of discovery." The retort would be: I disagree. It was only after the government released its control of the routing tables and removed the non-profit rules that the Internet finally exploded into what we know today. NASA has retarded spaceflight with its inefficient contracting based upon the congressional district in which the manufacturers are located, along with the government crushing alternatives by law. Isabella wasn't acting as head of government, she hocked her private jewels in order to fund the greedy S.O.B., and then sent her military over to kill unknown numbers of natives and put those few that survived into slavery to fill the coffers of Spain and, as a result, _ruin_ the Spanish economy for hundreds of years." But I digress... |
| montezuma Nov 17, 2007 11:16 AM EDT |
LOL Bob. Frankly I get a bit sick of (regular) politics in a linux forum so I (try to) keep mine to myself. |
| ColonelPanik Nov 17, 2007 6:02 PM EDT |
"No matter how paranoid or conspiracy-minded you are, what your government is actually doing is worse than you can imagine." |
| Bob_Robertson Nov 18, 2007 4:25 AM EDT |
"I don't know, I can imagine quite a bit."
---Han Solo |
| jdixon Nov 18, 2007 7:16 PM EDT |
> That's because I was being polite. Actually, the restraint is appreciated, as I don't think either of us would convince the other. However, I suspect you think I intended it as a criticism of government, which (though you may not credit it) is not the case. |
| theboomboomcars Nov 20, 2007 12:58 PM EDT |
I would be so bold to go back to the dinosaur analogy and say that the "meteorite" that will take out MS will be DRM. |
| hkwint Nov 20, 2007 3:56 PM EDT |
Quoting:I would be so bold to go back to the dinosaur analogy and say that the "meteorite" that will take out MS will be DRM. Probably it would be more like the whole asteroid belt landing on MS, with the asteroid belt representing lots of different reasons. Quoting:Governments subvert everything they touch to their purposes So does human kind, so did the Europeans when they annexed America, so does business, and especially so does Microsoft. In fact, that subverting is what them makes them survive. |
Posting in this forum is limited to members of the group: [ForumMods, SITEADMINS, MEMBERS.]
Becoming a member of LXer is easy and free. Join Us!