[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: [Linux-cluster] GFS vs GFS2



Hi,

On Wed, 2008-05-07 at 12:53 +0100, gordan bobich net wrote:
> For some reason, I always worry when people whether something that isn't 
> production ready _REALLY_ isn't production ready, or whether the 
> developers are just saying it isn't production ready for fun...
> 
> IIRC, the plan was that it will be ready by RHEL5.1, but additional 
> critical bugs were discovered, the fixes for which have, to my 
> knowledge, not made it into the distro yet.
> 
> Gordan
> 
This issue is that the rules for updating RHEL are that we can't put in
updates to GFS2 in RHEL 5.1 because GFS2 is a demo feature in 5.1 and we
don't want to potentially risk adding bugs by fixing unsupported
features. I know that it seems to have been a long time but, I hope,
understandably, we are cautious of risking other people's important data
on the filesystem until we are sure that we've sorted out all the issues
and have been through extensive testing.

The net result is that there is a delay between the "appears to work ok"
stage and the "this is supported" stage and thats more or less
inevitable.

Fedora (and rawhide in particular) is there to provide the "bleeding
edge" code for testing purposes ahead of the RHEL releases. I know that
we've been a bit slow in pushing updates (particularly of the gfs2-utils
and cman packages) into Fedora in the past. Thats changing and we should
be much better at keeping those uptodate in the future. The gfs2-utils
package was recently updated and cman is on the list to be done shortly,

Steve.



[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]