> OpenGFS is dead, especially now that GFS is free software again. Good to hear. OpenGFS was a hack. Still, there are people who still use it.
> And OpenDFS doesn't exist, the name only every appeared in some mail > posts regarding the free software license release of an old DCE version. Beg to differ. It exists, but has not been publicized due to the general architectural and deployment headache nastiness of DCE. I tinker with it to support a couple of mfg customers who actually bought DCE in the OSF/1 days and are still trying to keep it patched together. If you want a copy, let me know. It takes some fairly stiff development skills to make it work, however. > Lustre is also commonly called a cluster filesystem, but works very > differently, I would rather call it a massive-parallel distributed > filesyste. (Open-)AFS and DFS also fall into that distributed > filesystem category, but they are a lot less optimized for HPC > or big commercial workloads than lustre. True. Lustre still doesn't cope well with geodistribution, however. > GPFS also falls under the shared storeage filesystem category, but > it's not ported to 390 and a port would be rather non-trivial due > to some of it's design decisions. The GPFS kernel code is now > in theory available as free software aswell, but the IBM codedrop > I have is not actually buildable, and it lacks the userspace > which is very intimately tied with the kernel code. Yes. I don't care for GPFS, but it is an option for existing clusters and some shops insist on it's use. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 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
