Clusters

Lightning AI offers frontier-grade clusters with high-performance networking, storage and your choice of orchestrator.

To set up a cluster, contact our team.

Index

Orchestrator comparison

SLURM and Kubernetes each take a different approach to orchestrating compute. SLURM excels in high-performance batch workloads, and Kubernetes brings container-based flexibility and control. Each has its strengths and trade-offs.

Here's a comparison that highlights them at a glance.

Concept Kubernetes SLURM
Reserved machines Node Partition / Node
On-demand machines Cluster resizing (manual, brittle) Not native (requires schedulers & plugins)
Task type Pod Job script (sbatch, srun)
Single node training Pod for training (YAML, schedulers) srun / sbatch job
Multi-node training Pod for training (YAML, schedulers) srun / sbatch job (needs MPI plugin)
Inference Pod for inference (stateless) Not designed for inference
Development (IDE) Pod for dev (ephemeral, YAML) Interactive sessions
Data processing Pod for data prep Batch jobs (manual scripting)
Pipelines DIY (Argo, Airflow, K8s operators) DAGs with sbatch dependencies
Run PyTorch Special operators or plugins. srun + python script
File system DIY (NFS, CSI drivers, config-heavy) Shared FS (e.g., Lustre, GPFS)
Multi-cloud? Single-cloud only Single cluster only
Can be all on-demand? No (requires reserved capacity) No (requires partitions/nodes)
Can be all reserved? Yes Yes
User interface YAML, kubectl CLI CLI (srun, sbatch)
Workload abstraction Pod Job / Task
Scheduler model K8s default scheduler (for stateless pods) SLURM scheduler (optimized for batch jobs)
Who it serves best DevOps (infra control, utilization focus) HPC admins (batch workloads, MPI training)
Limitations Hard to make stateful ML workloads work well Brittle for ML, not elastic, HPC-centric

Was this page helpful?

What went wrong?

↑↓ Navigate↵ Open⌘↵ New tabesc Close