Am Donnerstag, 24. August 2006 15:40 schrieb ext Lars Wilke:
> Well, at least in Debian and ScientificLinux OpenAFS is available.
> For others i don't know.
Gentoo has ebuilds as well.
> That seems to be whole reason. Once i have read that there was a plan
> to create a kernel module which could
On Fri, 25 Aug 2006, Lars Wilke wrote:
* Derrick J Brashear wrote:
On Thu, 24 Aug 2006, Lars Wilke wrote:
The IBM Public License is incompatible with GPLv2 AFAIK
It depends what you mean by incompatible.
Hm, i meant that here
http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/license-list.html
Look in the i
David Bear wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 24, 2006 at 06:52:49PM -0400, Jeffrey Altman wrote:
>> Sounds like the user's afs client is not receiving callback breaks.
>> You should figure out why.
>>
>> * Firewall?
>
> no
If this is XP SP2 it has a firewall.
>> * File server can't distinguish old client
On Thu, Aug 24, 2006 at 06:52:49PM -0400, Jeffrey Altman wrote:
> Sounds like the user's afs client is not receiving callback breaks.
> You should figure out why.
>
> * Firewall?
no
>
> * NAT?
no
>
> * File server can't distinguish old clients that do not have UUIDs?
UUID? is that an
* Derrick J Brashear wrote:
> On Thu, 24 Aug 2006, Lars Wilke wrote:
> >The IBM Public License is incompatible with GPLv2 AFAIK
> It depends what you mean by incompatible.
Hm, i meant that here
http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/license-list.html
Look in the incompatible section.
At least the GNU
Sounds like the user's afs client is not receiving callback breaks.
You should figure out why.
* Firewall?
* NAT?
* File server can't distinguish old clients that do not have UUIDs?
* File server can't distinguish clients that have cloned UUIDs?
Jeffrey Altman
David Bear wrote:
> I h
Before I reinvent a wheel I'm unaware of, I figured I'd
ask.
What are people using for AFS performance monitoring?
Even if it's scout or afsmonitor, please respond. I would
like to hear how people are using these as well (what
makes the most sense to monitor for general purposes, etc).
___
On Thu, 24 Aug 2006, Jeff Blaine wrote:
> What are people using for AFS performance monitoring?
That depends on what you mean by "AFS performance".
You could write a big file into AFS space every 10 minutes
or so and measure how long it takes. Make a plot out of it.
Same for reading. We are not d
I have a user that says he has to refresh explorer any time he makes a
change to files in afs, either through moving files or creating
folders.
I am assuming this is a windows explorer issue but could find quickly
any way to change the behavior. Has any one else seen this and fixed
it?
--
David
Mathias Feiler wrote:
>Hello Michael!
>
>Well, imho You think like IBM-manager about DCE/DFS do. Are you anyhow
>connected to IBM?
>
>
>
Actually, I'm just an unpedigreed geek, but thank-you for the compliment.
Michael
___
OpenAFS-info mailing list
Op
Lars Wilke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> The IBM Public License is incompatible with GPLv2 AFAIK That seems to be
> whole reason. Once i have read that there was a plan to create a kernel
> module which could have a compatible license, so the kernel module could
> be included in the mainline kerne
Michael D Norwick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Could someone please explain the fundamental differences between OpenAFS
> and RedHat's GFS. In reading their (RedHat's) list of features it
> sounds a lot like OpenAFS with changes in nomenclature. They talk about
> charateristics such as scalable
On Thu, 24 Aug 2006, Lars Wilke wrote:
The IBM Public License is incompatible with GPLv2 AFAIK
It depends what you mean by incompatible.
Derrick
___
OpenAFS-info mailing list
OpenAFS-info@openafs.org
https://lists.openafs.org/mailman/listinfo/opena
Hi,
* Benko wrote:
> I'm currently trying to set up a testcluster with heartbeat, drbd and a
> openafs-fileserver. Heartbeat and drbd are running beautifully, but
> setting up the openafs failover seems to be quite difficult.
> [...]
> Finally - do you still use the same method for the openafs-fai
* David Werner wrote:
> I wonder why they did not support OpenAFS as "product" is much longer
> available in pretty good working state on the market.
Well, at least in Debian and ScientificLinux OpenAFS is available.
For others i don't know.
> Maybe licensing issues or dislikeness of stable binar
On Thu, 24 Aug 2006, Michael D. Norwick wrote:
|Could someone please explain the fundamental differences between OpenAFS
|and RedHat's GFS.
|In reading their (RedHat's) list of features it sounds a lot like
|OpenAFS with changes in nomenclature.
|They talk about charateristics such as scalable vol
Could someone please explain the fundamental differences between OpenAFS
and RedHat's GFS.
In reading their (RedHat's) list of features it sounds a lot like
OpenAFS with changes in nomenclature.
They talk about charateristics such as scalable volumes, and fail-safe
replication and I'm wondering
if
17 matches
Mail list logo
