Re: LAM/MPI Parallel processing

[Simon Valiquette <Simon.Valiquette@example.com>]

"Stephen J. Turnbull" wrote:

> Simon> I would say that most people use the term Beowulf just
> 
> Sure.  I was talking in general.  It is still a very bad idea to use a
> word "just because others do," which was your original excuse.
> 
> Simon>   I also found that definition from http://www.beowulf.org/
> Simon>   after cliking on Beowulf FAQ:
> 
> See?  If I hadn't been a complete asshole about it, you wouldn't have
> done the necessary research[1], would you?  :-)

  I already known before that definition of a Beowulf, but I admitly
did'nt know the precise definition before I actually had to setup one. 
At least, your remark probably helped many poeple to know what really is
a Beowulf.

>   Note that beowulf.org is apparently maintained by scyld.com.  The
> references aren't independent.

  It's true, and the fact that the official definition of a Beowulf may
have changed probably created a lot of confusion.  You are also right in
pointing out that many people (maybe most of them) don't use the name
Beowulf properly.  I also myself used many time in the past the term
Beowulf for a cluster that had nothing in common with a Beowulf.

Simon Valiquette