- tate ( @tate@lemmy.sdf.org ) 133•10 days ago
Ah hahahaha!!!
Windows! Some dumbass put Windows on a supercomputer!
- steal_your_face ( @steal_your_face@lemmy.ml ) English52•10 days ago
Prob Microsoft themselves
- Allero ( @Allero@lemmy.today ) 42•10 days ago
Ironically, even Microsoft uses Linux in its Azure datacenters, iirc
- dan ( @dan@upvote.au ) 7•9 days ago
They use a mixture of Windows and Linux. They do use Linux quite a bit, but they also have a lot of Hyper-V servers.
- Allero ( @Allero@lemmy.today ) 3•8 days ago
True. Never meant to say they use Linux exclusively; thanks for clarification anyway!
- IrritableOcelot ( @IrritableOcelot@beehaw.org ) 20•10 days ago
Good point.
But still, the 30% efficient supercomputer.
- AscendantSquid ( @AscendantSquid@lemm.ee ) 1•9 days ago
I don’t think either of the chart’s axes list efficiency?
- MajorHavoc ( @MajorHavoc@programming.dev ) 1•8 days ago
Heh. I don’t think that number was ever official, but I heard it as well.
- MajorHavoc ( @MajorHavoc@programming.dev ) 1•8 days ago
Heh. I don’t think that number was ever official, but I heard it as well.
- IrritableOcelot ( @IrritableOcelot@beehaw.org ) 2•5 days ago
Oh that was hyperbole, I didn’t expect to be taken literally!
- MajorHavoc ( @MajorHavoc@programming.dev ) 2•5 days ago
Lol. Well good guess.
I’m not a primary source or anything, of course. Your comment just matches something I heard once in office gossip.
- PlanterTree ( @PlanterTree@discuss.tchncs.de ) English2•6 days ago
Interesting how the tiny BSD fraction had a lead over Linux in 1995
- menemen ( @menemen@lemmy.ml ) 24•9 days ago
Surprised to learn that there were windows based Supercomputers.
- Spezi ( @Spezi@feddit.org ) 44•9 days ago
Those were the basic entry level configurations needed to run Windows Vista with Aero effects.
- ipkpjersi ( @ipkpjersi@lemmy.ml ) 17•10 days ago
Wow, that’s kind of a lot more Linux than I was expecting, but it also makes sense. Pretty cool tbh.
- erwan ( @erwan@lemmy.ml ) 5•9 days ago
Linux is just the unix flavor that replaced the others.
- dan ( @dan@upvote.au ) 4•9 days ago
Linux isn’t a UNIX flavor. It’s UNIX-like.
- Mwa ( @Mwa@lemm.ee ) English13•9 days ago
Maybe windows is not used in supercomputers often because unix and linux is more flexiable for the cpus they use(Power9,Sparc,etc)
- Matt ( @DieserTypMatthias@lemmy.ml ) 6•9 days ago
Plus Linux doesn’t limit you in the number of drives, whereas Windows limits you from A to Z. I read it here.
- Viper_NZ ( @Viper_NZ@lemmy.nz ) 5•9 days ago
You can mount drives against folders in windows. So while D: is one drive, D:\Logs or D:\Cake can each be a different disk.
- filcuk ( @filcuk@lemmy.zip ) 2•8 days ago
What in the world? I don’t think I’ve ever seen that in the wild
- Viper_NZ ( @Viper_NZ@lemmy.nz ) 1•8 days ago
It’s common in the server world. KB article on it is here.
- ILikeBoobies ( @ILikeBoobies@lemmy.ca ) 2•9 days ago
For people who haven’t installed Windows before, the default boot drive is G, and the default file system is C
So you only have 25 to work with (everything but G)
- Fonzie! ( @lord_ryvan@ttrpg.network ) 2•8 days ago
Almost, the default boot drive is C:, everything gets mapped after that. So if you have a second HDD at D: and a disk reader at E:, any USBs you plug in would go to F:.
- ILikeBoobies ( @ILikeBoobies@lemmy.ca ) 1•8 days ago
Why do you copy the boot files from C and put them in G during install then?
- Fonzie! ( @lord_ryvan@ttrpg.network ) 1•8 days ago
I don’t think anybody does that, honestly.
- ILikeBoobies ( @ILikeBoobies@lemmy.ca ) 1•7 days ago
You can have a helper script do it for you (the gui) but it still happening in the background
- Fonzie! ( @lord_ryvan@ttrpg.network ) 1•7 days ago
The boot files go into C:, not G:.
Windows can’t operate if you did that, it doesn’t let you.
- ChaoticNeutralCzech ( @ChaoticNeutralCzech@feddit.org ) English2•9 days ago
G can be mapped after boot (usually to removable drives)
- Mwa ( @Mwa@lemm.ee ) English1•9 days ago
Ok that would make sense tbh
- Kazumara ( @Kazumara@discuss.tchncs.de ) 3•8 days ago
More importantly, they can’t adapt Windows to their needs.
- Mwa ( @Mwa@lemm.ee ) English2•8 days ago
Yep the other reason.
- MajorHavoc ( @MajorHavoc@programming.dev ) 3•8 days ago
That’s certainly a big part of it. When one needs to buy a metric crap load of CPUs, one tends to shop outside the popular defaults.
Another big reason, historically, is that Supercomputers didn’t typically have any kind of non-command-line way to interact with them, and Windows needed it.
Until PowerShell and Windows 8, there were still substantial configuration options in Windows that were 100% managed by graphical packages. They could be changed by direct file edits and registry editing, but it added a lot of risk. All of the “did I make a mistake” tools were graphical and so unavailable from command line.
So any version of Windows stripped down enough to run on any super-computer cluster was going to be missing a lot of features, until around 2006.
Since Linux and Unix started as command line operating systems, both already had plenty fully featured options for Supercomputing.
- synestia ( @synestia@lemmy.ml ) 11•8 days ago
I saw the thumbnail and thought this was a map of The Netherlands
One of the Top 500 supercountries
- exu ( @exu@feditown.com ) English7•8 days ago
Technically accurate
- Fonzie! ( @lord_ryvan@ttrpg.network ) 1•8 days ago
Aw thanks!
- whoisearth ( @whoisearth@lemmy.ca ) 11•9 days ago
Now the real question is what package manager are they using? apt or yum? Lol
- _cryptagion ( @_cryptagion@lemmy.dbzer0.com ) English16•9 days ago
they specifically built it to only use snaps
- whoisearth ( @whoisearth@lemmy.ca ) 2•9 days ago
They’re all Ubuntu distros lol
Also, Gnome or KDE?
- dosuser123456 ( @dosuser123456@lemmy.sdf.org ) 2•5 days ago
yes
- Flax ( @Flax_vert@feddit.uk ) English14•9 days ago
It’s probably mostly cli
- ReCursing ( @ReCursing@lemmings.world ) 7•9 days ago
Yeah, but gterminal or konsole?
edit: apparently people didn’t realise this was a really obvious joke
- Flax ( @Flax_vert@feddit.uk ) English5•9 days ago
That’s a terminal emulator
- ReCursing ( @ReCursing@lemmings.world ) 5•9 days ago
thatsthejoke.jpg
- theshatterstone54 ( @theshatterstone54@feddit.uk ) 3•9 days ago
TTY
- downhomechunk ( @downhomechunk@midwest.social ) English2•8 days ago
Slackpkg or slackpkg+, without a doubt.
- Psyhackological ( @Psyhackological@lemmy.ml ) 1•8 days ago
Portage (Gentoo)
- Zucca ( @Zucca@sopuli.xyz ) 10•8 days ago
“Is your UNIX Linux compatible?”
- snek_boi ( @snek_boi@lemmy.ml ) 9•10 days ago
This looks impressive for Linux, and I’m glad FLOSS has such an impact! However, I wonder if the numbers are still this good if you consider more supercomputers. Maybe not. Or maybe yes! We’d have to see the evidence.
There’s no reason to believe smaller supercomputers would have significantly different OS’s.
At some point you enter the realm of mainframes and servers.
Mainframes almost all run Linux now, the last Unix’s are close to EOL.
Servers have about a 75% Linux market share, with the rest mostly running Windows and some BSD.- MajorHavoc ( @MajorHavoc@programming.dev ) 5•6 days ago
I wonder if the numbers are still this good if you consider more supercomputers.
Great question. My guess is not terribly different.
“Top 500 Supercomputers” is arguably a self-referential term. I’ve seen the term “super-computer” defined whether it was among the 500 fastest computer in the world, on the day it went live.
As new super-computers come online, workloads from older ones tend to migrate to the new ones.
So my impression is there usually aren’t a huge number of currently operating supercomputers outside of the top 500.
When a super-computer falls toward the bottom of the top 500, there’s a good chance it is getting turned off soon.
That said, I’m referring here only to the super-computers that spend a lot of time advertising their existence.
I suspect there’s a decent number out there today that prefer not to be listed. But I have no reason to think those don’t also run Linux.
- SocialMediaRefugee ( @SocialMediaRefugee@lemmy.ml ) 6•10 days ago
Just need to do a dnf update on them all…
- tiz ( @tiz@lemmy.ml ) 6•9 days ago
Can we get a source for this image?
Sure. Added it to the post.
- Xatolos ( @Xatolos@reddthat.com ) 5•9 days ago
- Rogue ( @Rogue@feddit.uk ) 4•10 days ago
Any idea how it’d look if broken down into distros? I’m assuming enterprise support would be favoured so Red Hat or Ubuntu would dominate?
The previously fastest ran on Red Hat Enterprise Linux, the current fastest runs on SUSE Enterprise Linux.
The current third fastest (owned by Microsoft) runs Ubuntu. That’s as far as I care to research.- shekau ( @shekau@lemmy.today ) 5•10 days ago
current fastest runs on SUSE Enterprise Linux
No wayyy! Why SUSE tho?
- veroxii ( @veroxii@aussie.zone ) 9•10 days ago
Because all the Arch consultants were busy posting on the internet.
- MajorHavoc ( @MajorHavoc@programming.dev ) 1•8 days ago
Suoer-computing is a pain-in-the-ass, so my guess is some combination of SUSE picking up top talent that left other Linux vendors as IBM has been purchasing them, and SUSE just being willing to put in the extra work for the added brand recognition.
- thingsiplay ( @thingsiplay@beehaw.org ) 2•10 days ago
I can’t imagine Supercomputers to use a mainstream operating system such as Ubuntu. But clearly people even put Windows on it, so I shouldn’t be surprised…
They do use Ubuntu, Red Hat and SUSE mostly.
But for customers like that, the companies are of course willing to adjust the distro to their needs, with full support.
Microsoft uses their own Linux distro now.