On Jan 4, 2012, at 6:03 AM, Cittaro Davide wrote: > Hi Nate, > > On Jan 3, 2012, at 10:15 PM, Nate Coraor wrote: >> >> That said, if you have a lot interim steps that produce large data that then >> get merged via some process back to final outputs, it absolutely makes sense >> to use local disk for those steps (assuming local disk is large enough - >> another problem that we sometimes encounter). >> > > Wouldn't mean that most of the workflows dealing with NGS data should run on > local disks?
It depends on the location and ordering of the steps - If you're parallelizing single steps across multiple nodes, it wouldn't make sense. If you run multiple steps serially on a single node, then you could work locally between those steps. --nate > > d > > /* > Davide Cittaro, PhD > > Head of Bioinformatics Core > Center for Translational Genomics and Bioinformatics > San Raffaele Scientific Institute > Via Olgettina 58 > 20132 Milano > Italy > > Office: +39 02 26439140 > Mail: cittaro.dav...@hsr.it > Skype: daweonline > */ > > > > > > > > > > > ___________________________________________________________ > Please keep all replies on the list by using "reply all" > in your mail client. To manage your subscriptions to this > and other Galaxy lists, please use the interface at: > > http://lists.bx.psu.edu/ ___________________________________________________________ Please keep all replies on the list by using "reply all" in your mail client. To manage your subscriptions to this and other Galaxy lists, please use the interface at: http://lists.bx.psu.edu/
