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

Raspberry Pi Server Mark III

uplab.pro

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 173 posts

Re: Raspberry Pi Server Mark III

#161

Post by varispeed »

fartcannon wrote: post #155
varispeed wrote: post #140

Why there is so much love for such project where someone connected a couple of ready made things (maybe except the case) and everyone gets excited?

Why are pop music, fast food and sitcoms so extremely popular? They maximize a small amount of appeal across a broad group. Every step deeper, or obscure loses you more and more mass appeal. Therefore, projects with high max appeal make it to the top of lists like HN. It's no conspiracy.

Pop music is extremely difficult to make although the end product looks "simple".

Re: Raspberry Pi Server Mark III

#162

Post by [deleted] »

nixgeek wrote: post #113
Galanwe wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Learn linux clustering/diskless nodes. Honestly, could be as valid with a setup that just involves running a bunch of VMs. > Low power consumption Yeah, well, a typical laptop should draw around 50W, which is what, like 0.05$ a day? > Commercial advantage: Run highly cost and power efficient data centers Hu, no, in terms of power efficiency per unit of work, you will not beat specialized hardware. > Infrastructure…

> Yeah, well, a typical laptop should draw around 50W, which is what, like 0.05$ a day? At least where I live that would be 1.2kWh and about 13 cents per day, around $4 per month, or around $50 per year if running 24x7. Pacific Northwest has I believe some of the cheaper power in the U.S. at 10-11 cents per kilowatt hour.

[deleted]

Re: Raspberry Pi Server Mark III

#163

Post by flemhans »

dheera wrote: post #124
thetanil wrote: post #44

Running a 6 node cluster of Pi4s at home now. Did some benchmarks. Long story short. USB thumb drive boot disks are better performance and cheaper than SD cards. Fans are completely unnecessary on a Pi4 with an aluminum heat shield style "case". They do run hotter than with a fan, but they will not be heat throttled with recent firmware.

USB isn't very good for high vibration environments (e.g. inside robots) though :-/ Worst abomination of a connector design I've seen in a couple decades. I wish they had locking industrial connectors on the USB ports on the Pi ... although a SATA/m.2 would be nicer.

Does a little drop of glue fix the issue, or is there something else?

Re: Raspberry Pi Server Mark III

#164

Post by paco3346 »

varispeed wrote: post #140

Why there is so much love for such project where someone connected a couple of ready made things (maybe except the case) and everyone gets excited?

I think for me there's just a hobby/cool factor. I have no intention to build one nor can I think of a good use case but it's still neat to look at someone else's handiwork.

Re: Raspberry Pi Server Mark III

#165

Post by metalliqaz »

gtvwill wrote: post #136
metalliqaz wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There isn't one. For actually delivering an application, a traditional server is better in every way, unless your application is so small that you are wasting your hardware and get killed on power costs. It's more or less the same as the people in /r/homelab who have full server racks in their basements but never do anything with most of their eBay servers other than install CentOS on them. At least those can serve m…

lol brrrrt. Actually there's heaps of cases. Traditional servers are large, power hungry and generally 10-100x the compute power most jobs need if you buy a piece of hardware for a site. Traditional server also requires expensive monkey like me to service. RPI rack on other hand. plug and play. Cheap as chips to keep failover as you can keep backup rigs in a cupboard. It doesnt require expensive monkey to unplug bits…

Disks, man. Where are your disks??? Compute by itself is next to useless for anything serious. You need data. What do you need a compute node for if you don't have any data? You could just do it client-side in the browser.

Re: Raspberry Pi Server Mark III

#166

Post by scld »

dheera wrote: post #124
thetanil wrote: post #44

Running a 6 node cluster of Pi4s at home now. Did some benchmarks. Long story short. USB thumb drive boot disks are better performance and cheaper than SD cards. Fans are completely unnecessary on a Pi4 with an aluminum heat shield style "case". They do run hotter than with a fan, but they will not be heat throttled with recent firmware.

USB isn't very good for high vibration environments (e.g. inside robots) though :-/ Worst abomination of a connector design I've seen in a couple decades. I wish they had locking industrial connectors on the USB ports on the Pi ... although a SATA/m.2 would be nicer.

I guess that's why you'd move to the compute module?

Re: Raspberry Pi Server Mark III

#167

Post by dheera »

flemhans wrote: post #163
dheera wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

USB isn't very good for high vibration environments (e.g. inside robots) though :-/ Worst abomination of a connector design I've seen in a couple decades. I wish they had locking industrial connectors on the USB ports on the Pi ... although a SATA/m.2 would be nicer.

Does a little drop of glue fix the issue, or is there something else?

Not really, because that makes it really hard to unplug/replug for servicing.

I wish USB was designed to at least snugly support housing to housing of connectors and not have the entire connector supported by a flimsy piece of sheet metal soldered to a PCB.

Re: Raspberry Pi Server Mark III

#170

Post by Tepix »

throwaway4good wrote: post #21
rovr138 wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That depends on the task.

I challenge you to find a single application where a setup of 14 raspberry pi's will beat the new mac mini.

Here's one off the top of my head:

Serving web pages. A single Raspberry Pi 4 can manage 943 Mbit on its Gigabit port.

You might be able to buy (expensive) 40 Gigabit network adapters for the two TB4 ports of the Mac Mini. You'd still be slower.

Post reply on HN