Are the release notes correct where they state that
Lustre 1.8.4 runs on RHEL 5.5 and
Lustre 2.0.0 runs on RHEL 5.4?
Does that mean that there is no upgrade path from 1.8.4 to 2.0.0?
--
Andrew
___
Lustre-discuss mailing list
Andrew
The difference in the distro support (and the earlier noted discrepancy
with the versions of OFED supported) is simply because Lustre 2.0.0 was
frozen before Lustre 1.8.4 and so missed the opportunity to get these
more current releases.
However, it is true that upgrading from 1.8.4 to
Original Message
Subject: Re: [Lustre-discuss] Announce: Lustre 1.8.4 is available!
Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2010 15:00:46 -0700
From: Jay Lan jay.zen@gmail.com
To: Terry Rutledge terry.rutle...@oracle.com
CC: lustre-discuss@lists.lustre.org
Hello!
On Aug 26, 2010, at 1:07 PM, Dulcardo Arteaga Clavijo wrote:
I am trying to compare the performance of Lustre for parallel write to
a shared file with locks and
without locks. But after doing some experiments I didn't see any
performance improvement when I run without locks.
It all
Are their issues with Samba and Lustre working together? I remember
something about turning oplocks off in samba, and while testing samba
I noticed this
[2010/08/27 17:30:59, 3] lib/util.c:fcntl_getlock(2064)
fcntl_getlock: lock request failed at offset 75694080 count 65536
type 1 (Function not
Hello!
On Aug 27, 2010, at 6:41 PM, David Noriega wrote:
But I also found out about the flock option for lustre. Should I set
flock on all clients? or can I just use localflock option on the
fileserver?
It depends.
If you are 100% sure none of your other clients use flocks in a way similar to
