On 5/9/07, Mark Post <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> On Wed, May 9, 2007 at 10:50 AM, in message
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Little, Chris"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I haven't seen a status (or statistics) recently for OCFS2. How is it
> doing? I can't remember whether it's suitable as a general purpose
> clustered file system.
I haven't seen any performance statistics for it either, but it is indeed
suitable as a general purpose cluster file system. If I ever get the time,
I'll do some playing around with it.
Mark Post
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit
http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390
What I find interesting is that OCFS2 was not even in the list of
cluster file systems presented by David. If a shop has Oracle and
might consider clustering Oracle (may be RAC), would it make sense to
look at anything else but OCFS2?
Now if that same shop needs clustering for non-Oracle guests, would it
make sense to have two different type of clustering file systems?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit
http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390
