Re: [Linux-cluster] GFS

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

 



> Note that this sounds like perfectly correct behavior on the part of gfs.
> The application is responsible for the necessary file locking, of course,
> while gfs is responsible for keeping the fs uncorrupted.

Well on my side, do the redhat guys see any problem with me running
gfs on my mailstore for 1m users on a fast ibm san ?

P

</N>


[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