Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

How NASA built Artemis II’s fault-tolerant computer

cacm.acm.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 257 posts

Re: How NASA built Artemis II’s fault-tolerant computer

#31

Post by ramraj07 »

HNisCIS wrote: post #15
ramraj07 wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I take the opposite message from that line - out of touch teams working on something so over budget and so overdue, and so bureaucratic, and with such an insanely poor history of success, and they talk as if they have cured cancer. This is the equivalent of Altavista touting how amazing their custom server racks are when Google just starts up on a rack of naked motherboards and eats their lunch and then the world. Le…

What would you suggest? Vibe coding a react app that runs on a Mac mini to control trajectory? What happens when that Mac mini gets hit with an SEU or even a SEGR? Guess everyone just dies?

[flagged]

Re: How NASA built Artemis II’s fault-tolerant computer

#32

Post by mvkel »

dmk wrote: post #3

The quote from the CMU guy about modern Agile and DevOps approaches challenging architectural discipline is a nice way of saying most of us have completely forgotten how to build deterministic systems. Time-triggered Ethernet with strict frame scheduling feels like it's from a parallel universe compared to how we ship software now.

If you look at code as art, where its value is a measure of the effort it takes to make, sure.

Re: How NASA built Artemis II’s fault-tolerant computer

#33

Post by zenoprax »

bluegatty wrote: post #22
geerlingguy wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean I can just replace Dropbox with a shell script.

That's funny because you could! Dropbox started a shell script :) Funny though I would assume HN people would respect how hard real-time stuff and 'hardened' stuff is.

I think GP is referencing this somewhat [in]famous post/comment: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8863#9224

Re: How NASA built Artemis II’s fault-tolerant computer

#34

Post by __d »

Does anyone have pointers to some real information about this system? CPUs, RAM, storage, the networking, what OS, what language used for the software, etc etc?

I’d love to know how often one of the FCMs has “failed silent”, and where they were in the route and so on too, but it’s probably a little soon for that.

Re: How NASA built Artemis II’s fault-tolerant computer

#35

Post by vlovich123 »

ramraj07 wrote: post #29
danhon wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You mean like this? "With limited funds, Google founders Larry Page and Sergey Brin initially deployed this system of inexpensive, interconnected PCs to process many thousands of search requests per second from Google users. This hardware system reflected the Google search algorithm itself, which is based on tolerating multiple computer failures and optimizing around them. This production server was one of about thir…

The problem they solved isn't easy. But its not some insane technical breakthrough either. Literally add redundancy, thats the ask. They didnt invent quantum computing to solve the issue did they? Why dunk on sprints?

Wow. What a hand wave away of the intrinsic challenge of writing fault tolerant distributed systems. It only seems easy because of decades of research and tools built since Google did it, but by no means was it something you could trivially add to a project as you can today.

Re: How NASA built Artemis II’s fault-tolerant computer

#37

Post by Sebguer »

y1n0 wrote: post #16

NASA didn't build this, Lockheed Martin and their subcontractors did. Articles and headlines like this make people think that NASA does a lot more than they actually do. This is like a CEO claiming credit for everything a company does.

will nobody think of the megacorps!!!

Re: How NASA built Artemis II’s fault-tolerant computer

#38

Post by adrian_b »

y1n0 wrote: post #16

NASA didn't build this, Lockheed Martin and their subcontractors did. Articles and headlines like this make people think that NASA does a lot more than they actually do. This is like a CEO claiming credit for everything a company does.

Lockheed Martin and their subcontractors did the implementation.

We do not know how much of the high-level architecture of the system has been specified by NASA and how much by Lockheed Martin.

Re: How NASA built Artemis II’s fault-tolerant computer

#39

Post by tosapple »

linzhangrun wrote: post #13
totetsu wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They dont go into here.. but I thought that NASA also used like 250nm chips in space for radiation resistance. Are there even any radiation resistance GPUs out there?

[flagged]

[dead]
Post reply on HN