Hi all:<br><br>I'm in the process of building a large Starcluster installation. It is going to be supported by a linux support group that is used to its own internal support processes, and we're trying to migrate the support over to the cloud in a way that is most convenient for the support group. <br>
<br>One question that has arisen: would it be better to use EBS-backed instances, to handle various automatic update patch / kernel update cycles? It would be more like their usual setup, in that they could point their current updating scripts to run on an existing cluster, instead of having to boot a new base instance to make the updates on. <br>
<br>However, does using EBS also add some complications? First, how difficult would it be to build a starcluster base AMI as an EBS-backed image? Are there complications with that? <br><br>Furthermore, if I modify a running EBS-backed instance that has been updated a bit, then start another cluster from the same AMI without stopping the first one, presumably the changes would have to be made again? And then, if the changes made were slightly different on the second cluster, would I kind of have two diverged systems? In other words, all the problems mentioned here: <a href="http://www.magpiebrain.com/2010/07/19/aws-s3-vs-ebs-backed-instances/">http://www.magpiebrain.com/2010/07/19/aws-s3-vs-ebs-backed-instances/</a><br>
<br>Does anyone have thoughts about this? <br><br>Thanks!<br>Dan<br>
<br><br>