Gentoo Archives: gentoo-cluster

From: "John R. Dunning" <jrd@××××××××.com>
To: gentoo-cluster@l.g.o
Subject: [gentoo-cluster] examples of (large) Gentoo clusters
Date: Tue, 05 Dec 2006 21:30:34
Message-Id: 17781.58466.638881.939612@gs105.sicortex.com
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-cluster] examples of (large) Gentoo clusters by Daniel van Ham Colchete
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