I find X windows to be a bit too compute intensive. Maybe something like
apple's interface would be a good alternative [for those who don't need
X-windows' powerful graphic features].
regards
-kamal
Scott Long wrote:
Jason C. Wells wrote:
--On Wednesday, December 01, 2004 3:02 PM -0700 Scott Long
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
5. Clustered FS support. SANs are all the rage these days, and
clustered filesystems that allow data to be distributed across many
storage enpoints and accessed concurrently through the SAN are very
powerful. RedHat recently bought Sistina and re-opened the GFS source
code, so exploring this would be very interesting.
This sounds very close to OpenAFS. I don't know what distinguishes a
SAN from other types of NAS. OpenAFS does everything you mentioned
in the above paragraph. OpenAFS _almost_ works on FreeBSD right now.
Later,
Jason C. Wells
Well, AFS requires an intelligent node in front of each disk. True SAN
clustering means that you have a web of disks directly connected to the
SAN (iSCSI, FibreChannel, etc), and two or more servers on the SAN that
see those disks as a single filesystem (actually a bit more complicated
than this, but you get the point). If one server goes down, no access
to data is lost since the disks can be reached from any other server on
the SAN that is participating in the clustered FS.
Scott
_______________________________________________
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers
To unsubscribe, send any mail to
"[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
_______________________________________________
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
