skip to main content
10.1145/2380790.2380801acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesiteConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Comparison of VM deployment methods for HPC education

Published:11 October 2012Publication History

ABSTRACT

Operating System virtualization has seen major adoption across many industry fields, this growth has driven penetration into more traditional settings such as high performance computing and cluster systems. Developing an effective and efficient teaching environment for virtual high performance computing systems is complicated by a wide range of virtualization systems (open source and commercial), a variety of hardware platforms, and many different storage approaches for storing and distributing virtual machine images. Coupled with the growth in virtualization is the need for reliable, high performance storage subsystems optimized for the specific performance needs of the installation. This paper describes our experiences with using virtualization for virtual high performance computing clusters for education, and compares the performance of the popular OpenNebula virtualization manager using both NFS and SSH for virtual machine image sharing. Our results show it is possible to develop an effective teaching environment using commodity desktop computers and network hardware along with open source virtualization software.

References

  1. Adaptive Computing. orque resource manager, 2011.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. A. Chierici and R. Veraldi. A quantitative comparison between xen and kvm, 2010.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. Citrix Systems. Xen hypervisor, 2012.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. Dell Computer. Optiplex desktops, 2011.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. J. Fontán, T. Vázquez, L. Gonzalez, R. Montero, and I. Llorente. Opennebula: The open source virtual machine manager for cluster computing. In Open Source Grid and Cluster Software Conference, 2008.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. W. Gropp. Mpich2: A new start for mpi implementations. Recent Advances in Parallel Virtual Machine and Message Passing Interface, pages 37--42, 2002. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. IOzone. Iozone filesystem benchmark, 2011.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. A. Kivity, Y. Kamay, D. Laor, U. Lublin, and A. Liguori. kvm: the linux virtual machine monitor. In Proceedings of the Linux Symposium, volume 1, pages 225--230, 2007.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. KVM Project. Kvm project, 2011.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. T. Naughton, S. Scott, B. Barrett, J. Squyres, A. Lumsdaine, and Y. Fang. The penguin in the pail-oscar cluster installation tool. In The 6th World Multi Conference on Systemics, Cybernetics and Informatics (SCI 2002), 2002.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. B. Nicolae, J. Bresnahan, K. Keahey, and G. Antoniu. efficient multideployment on clouds, 2011.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. T. Olivares, L. Orozco-Barbosa, F. Quiles, A. Garrido, and P. J. Garcia. Performance study of nfs over myrinet-based clusters for parallel multimedia applications. In Electrical and Computer Engineering, 2001. Canadian Conference on, volume 2, pages 999--1004 vol.2, 2001.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  13. Open Compute Project. Amd motherboard, 2011.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. Open-MPI Project. Open mpi: High performance computing, 2011.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. OpenNebula Project. Opennebula project, 2011.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. Orange File System Project. Welcome to the orange file system project, 2011.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. ROCK Linux. Rock linux distribution build kit, 2011.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. T. Site. Top500 list-november 2010 (1--100). Top500 Supercomputing Site {Website}, February, 5, 2011.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  19. The Cobbler Project. Cobbler project, 2011.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  20. The Ohio State University. Micro-benchmarks, 2011.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. VMWare Corporation. Vmware vsphere, 2012.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  22. J. Walters and V. Chaudhary. A fault-tolerant strategy for virtualized hpc clusters. Journal of Supercomputing, 50(3):209--239, 2009. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. Comparison of VM deployment methods for HPC education

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Login options

    Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

    Sign in
    • Published in

      cover image ACM Conferences
      RIIT '12: Proceedings of the 1st Annual conference on Research in information technology
      October 2012
      74 pages
      ISBN:9781450316439
      DOI:10.1145/2380790

      Copyright © 2012 ACM

      Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

      Publisher

      Association for Computing Machinery

      New York, NY, United States

      Publication History

      • Published: 11 October 2012

      Permissions

      Request permissions about this article.

      Request Permissions

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • research-article

      Acceptance Rates

      Overall Acceptance Rate51of116submissions,44%

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader