Re: [Linux-cluster] GNBD, how good it is ?

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

To: Discussion of clustering software components including GFS <linux-cluster@xxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [Linux-cluster] GNBD, how good it is ?
From: "Kevin P. Fleming" <kpfleming@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 08 Jul 2004 19:58:39 -0700
In-reply-to: <fb20c214040708114675b3a568@mail.gmail.com>
Organization: Back To Basics Network Management
References: <20040708144724.GB18751@max.zg.iskon.hr> <fb20c214040708114675b3a568@mail.gmail.com>
Reply-to: Discussion of clustering software components including GFS <linux-cluster@xxxxxxxxxx>
User-agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 0.7.1 (Windows/20040626)

Brian Jackson wrote:

iSCSI and HyperSCSI both work with GFS, so those are options. I
suppose you'd be better off answering the question of whether they are
stable enough for you.


Speaking of iSCSI, is anyone aware of a GPL Linux 2.6 iSCSI target?

Follow-Ups:
- Re: [Linux-cluster] GNBD, how good it is ?
  - From: Wim Coekaerts

References:
- [Linux-cluster] GNBD, how good it is ?
  - From: Kresimir Kukulj
- Re: [Linux-cluster] GNBD, how good it is ?
  - From: Brian Jackson

Prev by Date: Re: [Linux-cluster] GNBD, how good it is ?
Next by Date: Re: [Linux-cluster] GNBD, how good it is ?
Previous by thread: Re: [Linux-cluster] GNBD, how good it is ?
Next by thread: Re: [Linux-cluster] GNBD, how good it is ?
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread

[Index of Archives] [Corosync Cluster Engine] [GFS] [Linux Virtualization] [Centos Virtualization] [Centos] [Linux RAID] [Fedora Users] [Fedora SELinux] [Big List of Linux Books] [Yosemite Camping]

Powered by Linux