Stream Pooling Computer Resources

[Sterces]

Im not sure if this is the right place to post this.

 

I'm working on a Linux based concept of pooling memory, CPU commands and GPU resources from Zombie laptops or desktops using a main OS and feeder/powder IS Supplied machines.

 

Am I wasting my time? Is this already a thing?

 

My current plan is using USB OR Ethernet since wifi can be too slow to send data such as Visuals.

[Electronics Wizardy]

What is your goal to speed up, most clusting is app specific. 

 

your not doing shared memory on any interface a laptop has, they will all have a massive performance cut.

 

Your best option is to split the work up, then distrubte it to the systems.

[Sterces]

11 minutes ago, Electronics Wizardy said:

What is your goal to speed up, most clusting is app specific. 

 

your not doing shared memory on any interface a laptop has, they will all have a massive performance cut.

 

Your best option is to split the work up, then distrubte it to the systems.

That's the idea. I should have worded my post better.

The ONLY issue I've seen so far is Driver related. Because out of the box anything that requires heavy visuals e.i games would require those instructions on a larger scale.

I'm not even sure if this is possible since basically torenting data for anything heavy like this would have huge impacts on the CPU making this useless for gaming and mostly resourceful for large-scale computing.

[WereCatf]

31 minutes ago, Sterces said:

That's the idea. I should have worded my post better.

The ONLY issue I've seen so far is Driver related. Because out of the box anything that requires heavy visuals e.i games would require those instructions on a larger scale.

I'm not even sure if this is possible since basically torenting data for anything heavy like this would have huge impacts on the CPU making this useless for gaming and mostly resourceful for large-scale computing.

What you're trying to do is not possible.

[Sterces]

35 minutes ago, WereCatf said:

What you're trying to do is not possible.

Period? 

[WereCatf]

1 minute ago, Sterces said:

Period? 

Yes, period.

 

The only software you can use like this is software that has been designed from the get-go for clustering. Games, for example, are not designed for clustering. In order to use resources on multiple computers for software that isn't designed for clustering, you'd have to emulate a CPU and its memory-controller and therein lies a whole lot of issues, like e.g. a single instruction takes on average a minimum of 5 bytes, or 40 bits -- a CPU can execute that in a single clock, but to execute that on a remote PC, it'd take 40 times longer to just transfer that instruction over the network, plus all the overhead of IP-networking, transferring any memory that instruction touches, the CPU-flags and so on. You'd be looking at a lower performance than a typical office calculator. Not to mention that if any of the other CPU-cores -- emulated or real -- tried to access the same memory as the instructions you just sent over to the remote PC, all these cores would have to wait for the operation to finish, basically grinding everything to a halt and taking hundreds or thousands of times longer than it would with just a real, local CPU-core.

 

It is an entirely fucking infeasible thing to do.

[Sterces]

10 minutes ago, WereCatf said:

Yes, period.

 

The only software you can use like this is software that has been designed from the get-go for clustering. Games, for example, are not designed for clustering. In order to use resources on multiple computers for software that isn't designed for clustering, you'd have to emulate a CPU and its memory-controller and therein lies a whole lot of issues, like e.g. a single instruction takes on average a minimum of 5 bytes, or 40 bits -- a CPU can execute that in a single clock, but to execute that on a remote PC, it'd take 40 times longer to just transfer that instruction over the network, plus all the overhead of IP-networking, transferring any memory that instruction touches, the CPU-flags and so on. You'd be looking at a lower performance than a typical office calculator. Not to mention that if any of the other CPU-cores -- emulated or real -- tried to access the same memory as the instructions you just sent over to the remote PC, all these cores would have to wait for the operation to finish, basically grinding everything to a halt and taking hundreds or thousands of times longer than it would with just a real, local CPU-core.

 

It is an entirely fucking infeasible thing to do.

So even outside of normal software functionality this is pointless?

I figured using this as a mass calculator or mining division would prove possible since Instructions can be smaller than the actual work load on a CPU

[WereCatf]

5 minutes ago, Sterces said:

I figured using this as a mass calculator or mining division would prove possible since Instructions can be smaller than the actual work load on a CPU

A calculator? Calculating what, exactly? As for mining...just install mining-software on each PC. You don't need a cluster or virtual CPUs or anything like that for such.