Recent Changes - Search:

Surveys and data


Support to other department sections

Support Dr. Scient. thesis

Contribution to "Scientific infrastructure"

Obsolete, kept for reference

edit SideBar

Last update: May 12, 2021, at 06:55 AM
Version: pmwiki-2.2.134

Minutes workgroup meeting no. 5, 4 Jan 2007

Agenda Workgroup meeting no. 4
  • Bent Ole Ruud (CIPR)
  • Øyvind Natvik (IFG)
  • Terje Utheim (IFG)
  • Jens Havskov (IFG)
  • Jose Ojeda (IFG)
  • Ole Meyer (IFG)
Minutes taken by Ole Meyer
Meeting started 4 Jan 2007, kl. 13:00
Adjourned 14:00

1. Comments from Seismology group

  • Data collection from network of seismographs in Norway - the Norwegian National Seismic Network (NNSN) - is today based on Sun server running Solaris operation system. This server must be operational until a Linux version is ready. Preferable, there should be a replica system as backup. The NNSN server does not demand a high-end system with regard to processing power, so two of the current Sun machines could be allocated to this task (one as backup).
  • The NNSN data collecting server should be under local control. It must have access to the Internet as most data transfer uses this network.
  • In the near future data collection scheme will change. Instead of gathering only event data from the 30 (or so) field stations in NNSN, many stations will tranfer data continously in order to employ new real-time event detection methods. This new way of harvesting raw data will generate approx. 3 GByte per day - and about 1 TByte per year. The problem of data backup must be addressed.
  • Any larger seismic event in Norway will result in huge public demand for web based information. Current web system is of limited use and should be upgraded. An integrated approach is necessary, where data collection, processing and web presentation is treated as a whole. These matters should be taken into account when new IT system is planned.

2. Comments Ø.N.

  • Estimated price new hardware: NOK 200k
  • Estimated price storage system: NOK 2-300k
  • Presented draft conclusion (see below):

Draft conclusion, by Ø.N.

Difficult to draw conclusion. We can outline pro/con arguments and let dept. head decide.

OPTION 1: Migrating from Solaris to Linux (Redhat?)

Advantages of this solution:

  • More software packages are becoming available for this platform.
  • The new CGG cluster is Linux based; in this way we avoid maintaining two different platforms (Solaris and Linux - gaining efficiency).
  • We would no longer be dependent on a single hardware supplier (Sun).
  • Unix market share is declining. Linux is larger then Solaris in the server segment.

OPTION 2: We keep Solaris

Advantages of this solution:

  • All software we use today runs without problems on Sun/Solaris platform. Most of these programs are also available under Linux, but it is not certain that all will run under ONE SINGLE Linux distribution. It is difficult to obtain clear answers from suppliers as to which Linux distributions are compatible beside the one officially supported.
  • Solaris operating system is regarded as more mature and stabile then Linux. It has a leading position in the Unix market (33-35%).
Edit - History - Print - Search
Page last modified on September 28, 2011, at 12:03 PM
Electronics workshop
Department of Earth Science - University of Bergen