Fold-server users, hear me!

Okay, as you all know, I've been working on fold-server since last summer. Since its conception, it has had support for only one network layout - 2 adapters, one on your local network and the other on the "folding" network. However, I've had a few requests for a single-adapter version of fold-server. This is possible, and I can work on it...

BUT... it would mean abandoning the two-adapter idea entirely, at least for now.

So, which is it? I'm willing to continue the development along either path, but I'd rather work on something that people will _use_. Existing fold-server users could continue to use it (but at the expense of some reconfiguration), and the stumbling block for new users wouldn't be so high.

PS: For the technically minded, the reason I have to make this split is because I've hit a point in the deveploment of my web-config script where it'd be difficult to change to having variably named adapters (which is, more or less, what I'd need to fix to allow 1 or 2 adapters). There are several other things I'd need to change, but after I got that done it'd probably be relatively simple.

The only reason I dont use it is because of the 2nd Nic

So let me get this straight? You are talking about a 1 nic version that basically talks across your switches etc.?

How will this affect my current network set-up?

By the way. Dr_K13, if all that is stopping you is a second NIC, I can probably find one laying about.

Me personally, ditiching the route required in the router would be best. I know, limits boxen to 253 or so on one fold server but honestly, how many folks are running this many anyways. Yet alone, dedicated boxen.

Plus some routers (Dlink) flat out won't do a route. I know there are always work arounds, but to make things easier for everyone this is my idea.

I hope this explains it better that I did with text.

BTW, marty, there's a simple workaround which will be in 1.1 whether I switch to 1 adapter or not. It doesn't even slow down the internet much (latencies go up a few ms for things going thru fold-server). Wouldn't affect the folding at all.

while i don't run your fold server. i do run a windows setup that only uses the one nic method.. its fairly easy.. thou i can see why some ppl like the 2 nic version.

I dont get it. What the hell is a fold server?

I prefer proposed. I do not currently use the fold server though so don't rate a vote. It makes more sense though from my network sensibilities.

I Have an extra nic maybe I will try it soon!

Originally Posted by Irishllama

I dont get it. What the hell is a fold server?

It allows you to boot a set of computers over LAN, eliminating the need for hard drives on them. Then they start FAH, and production soars.

So that's how you borg 100+ computers?

Originally Posted by HekoAridese

So that's how you borg 100+ computers?

Well, if you've got 100+ computers dedicated for folding, yes!

But if you want to use them for anything else, probably not. The clients don't have much on them at all. If you consider 'vi' productivity software, then you're all set.

I want to know more, How do I set this up?

2 network cards all the way!! I could not have setup a farm with a single card. I use Microsoft's Remote Install Service on my LAN that I need to boot computers from PXE. If you have the Fold server using PXE and the Microsoft RIS Server using PXE this could be a bad thing. Is there a solution to this that I'm not aware of? Maybe if you use managed switches with VLANs?

Originally Posted by Irishllama

I want to know more, How do I set this up?

More reading would be required, and it can be found here at the bottom of the page. Hope it helps. If you have any further questions after you have read those FAQ's, feel free to come back and ask us.

GwilyaGwees

I think I like the proposed new version better. If I understand it correctly, this means that with the new version, I could attach the diskless boxes to my router, and they'll still know how to boot from and send work to the fold server?

I'd use the proposed method if I was to use it. Would make for a much simplier farm.

I say make one more round of fixes and improvements on the current distro to get it nice and stable, then switch to the new concept.

I would not be able to use the fold-server if it doesn't seperate the fold segment from the rest of the network(the network is a dorm network - rather unfriendly place to put your farm.).

So I voted for 2 nics - one nic would mean no more farm for me.

-E



EDIT:
LOL - not to mention all the people with net boot enabled machines who would boot up from the 1 nic fold-server and start folding for me(Not nescerray a bad thing but I won't become popular(Network admin I am))

I vote for the proposed system