On Wednesday, September 15, 2010, Andreas Dilger wrote:
> On 2010-09-15, at 13:32, Brock Palen wrote:
> > Thanks that is great to know. Is there much risk to try with 1.8 and
> > then back off to 1.6 if there are issues? Risk of data loss?
>
> We do not test/support formatting at a higher Lustre
On 2010-09-15, at 13:32, Brock Palen wrote:
> Thanks that is great to know. Is there much risk to try with 1.8 and then
> back off to 1.6 if there are issues? Risk of data loss?
We do not test/support formatting at a higher Lustre version, and then
downgrading below the original version used f
On 2010-09-15, at 12:36, Brock Palen wrote:
> We have a filesystem that we can't take down for a while to upgrade the oss's
> they are running 1.6.x we do have a need to quickly add some storage to it,
> and thus the new server would have 1.8.x
>
> Is there any problems with this? I know 1
We have a filesystem that we can't take down for a while to upgrade the oss's
they are running 1.6.x we do have a need to quickly add some storage to it,
and thus the new server would have 1.8.x
Is there any problems with this? I know 1.6.x isn't supported anymore and we
would like to mov
Honestly, we do not suggest the mixed mode as you mentioned unless you
have to for some special reasons.
There are some known interoperability issues between lustre-1.8 and
lustre-2.0. These are part of them in the list:
https://bugzilla.lustre.org/buglist.cgi?quicksearch=1.8%3C-%3E2.0+interop
