1 |
From: "Daniel van Ham Colchete" <daniel.colchete@×××××.com> |
2 |
Date: Tue, 5 Dec 2006 19:15:49 -0200 |
3 |
|
4 |
|
5 |
Well, my first Lustre test was crashing on every 'write' operation. |
6 |
Them I enabled LVM and it worked. I'm using only the vanilla 2.6.12.6 |
7 |
kernel with the lastest 1.4 release. |
8 |
|
9 |
I'd say something's manged in your kernel/patches. Perhaps due to 1.4; I went |
10 |
to 1.6 as soon as I was able to, and have no experience with the latest and |
11 |
greatest 1.4. |
12 |
|
13 |
Question: would you use Lustre 1.6 now or you would wait until the |
14 |
official version is out? |
15 |
|
16 |
If I had to ship today, I'd probably ship the 1.6b5 code. I find lustre 1.4 |
17 |
much more of a headache to configure and manage. Thankfully, I don't have to |
18 |
ship today; I expect by the time I do, cfs will have released the real 1.6 |
19 |
code. |
20 |
|
21 |
Question: do you expect in upgrade incopability between the current |
22 |
1.6 beta and next betas or the official version? |
23 |
|
24 |
What variety of incompatibility? On-disk format? On-the-wire format? |
25 |
Something else? The short answer is no, in general the cfs guys seem to do a |
26 |
pretty good job at making that stuff backward compatible. Having said that, |
27 |
there was some kind of an incompatibility between 1.6b4 and 1.6b5. So I guess |
28 |
they don't get it right all the time :-} |
29 |
|
30 |
The slightly longer answer is "ask cfs". I believe the answer you'll get is |
31 |
that they claim compatibility for one prior release, and that they make no |
32 |
claims about compatibility of beta code with anything else. |
33 |
-- |
34 |
gentoo-cluster@g.o mailing list |