Single node GFS2 has been pretty stable since May/June timeframe of this year, not sure which kernel version this mapped into. We did an errata release post RHEL 5.2 with a couple of fixes in a special gfs2-kmod rpm, but still is considered tech preview from a support perspective. Kevin On Thu, 2008-11-13 at 13:01 -0700, Andrew Neuschwander wrote: > Does this mean that it should work fine (i.e. no known issues) as a > local only file system (one node, with lock_nolock)? > > -A > -- > Andrew A. Neuschwander, RHCE > Linux Systems/Software Engineer > College of Forestry and Conservation > The University of Montana > http://www.ntsg.umt.edu > andrew@xxxxxxxxxxxx - 406.243.6310 > > Kevin Anderson wrote: > > For anything prior to the latest Fedora 9/10 kernels and RHEL 5.3, GFS2 > > is not considered stable and has known blatant issues with cluster > > coherent operations. RHEL 5.3 beta has been released with a working > > GFS2. This will move from our tech preview status to supported when RHEL > > 5.3 GA version. No one should be running GFS2 in a cluster production > > environment prior to these versions. > > > > Kevin > > > > On Fri, 2008-11-14 at 02:31 +0800, Achievement Chan wrote: > >> Dear All, > >> Is GFS2 stable for production system? Is it still not defined as > >> stable by redhat? > >> > >> I would like to use it with apache, and courier-imap (Maildir format mailbox) > >> > >> reagrds, > >> Achievement Chan > >> > >> -- > >> Linux-cluster mailing list > >> Linux-cluster@xxxxxxxxxx > >> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-cluster > > > > -- > > Linux-cluster mailing list > > Linux-cluster@xxxxxxxxxx > > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-cluster > > > > -- > Linux-cluster mailing list > Linux-cluster@xxxxxxxxxx > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-cluster -- Linux-cluster mailing list Linux-cluster@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-cluster
