On Thu, Sep 01, 2005 at 03:49:18PM +0100, Alan Cox wrote: > > - Why GFS is better than OCFS2, or has functionality which OCFS2 cannot > > possibly gain (or vice versa) > > > > - Relative merits of the two offerings > > You missed the important one - people actively use it and have been for > some years. Same reason with have NTFS, HPFS, and all the others. On > that alone it makes sense to include. That's GFS. The submission is about a GFS2 that's on-disk incompatible to GFS. -- Linux-cluster@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-cluster
