On Tue, Jun 12, 2007 at 11:07:27AM +0200, Frederik Wagner wrote: > Hi group, > > I was wondering about the stability of the gfs2 filesystem. > After the release of Scientific Linux 5 (SL5) I tried the gfs2 > filesystem on our FC SAN Storage with a two node cluster frontend (this > are supposed to be three in the future). > > The system was running well on SL44 and is now running well with SL5 and > gfs, but when I tried the gfs2 filesystem I had problems syncing (rsync) > back the storage data from the backup. I got reproducable write errors, > after which the whole filsystem was stuck and broken. > > Unluckily I had to install the system in to production with gfs now, so > I cannot post the error messages. (if the error messages are needed for > further debugging, i could set up a testsystem) So up to now I'm wondering: > 1. is gfs2 supposed to be completely stable? > 2. are there any known serious bugs i missed? > 3. why should i use gfs2 instead of gfs, except for a faster df command? :-) > 4. are there any documentation speaking about the gfs2 fs system in > detail? To me the documentation looks quite 'small'... gfs2 isn't ready to be used, stick with gfs1. Dave -- Linux-cluster mailing list Linux-cluster@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-cluster
