On Fri, 2004-11-19 at 16:33 -0800, David S. wrote: > > Does PVFS2 have posix semantics these days? > > It has a kernel interface, so it supports the familiar open(2), lseek(2), > read(2), write(2), ... calls. It doesn't provide POSIX semantics. What's different then? Are stat and friends still there and non- neutered? Or are we talking more along the lines of just minor things (to my current application) like sync/fsync differences? > > > > My understanding is that IBM will only support GPFS on IBM hardware... > > > > Our SAN is from IBM, and our servers and most of our clients are > IBM-branded commodity x86 hardware. IBM will support GPFS on non-IBM > commodity hardware if you pay it enough. But you'd have to really > enjoy pain to pay for GPFS. Why is GPFS painful? Do you have an order-of-magnitude guesstimate of how much you'd have to pay IBM to support GPFS on non-IBM hardware? Thanks! _______________________________________________ linux-lvm mailing list linux-lvm@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-lvm read the LVM HOW-TO at http://tldp.org/HOWTO/LVM-HOWTO/
