[Linux-cluster] GNBD, how good it is ?

[Gareth Bult]

Hi,

Sorry, my mistake, I read the list title as "linux-cluster" as opposed
to "redhat-linux-server-3.0-cluster".

As I'm no longer a RH user, and now I know, I'll unsubscribe.

Thanks for the clarification.

Regards,
Gareth.


On Sat, 2004-07-10 at 17:37 -0500, Johnny Hughes wrote:

> On Sat, 2004-07-10 at 16:46, Gareth Bult wrote: 
> 
> > Hi,
> > 
> > 
> > >What I think everyone is saying ... not implying, but saying... is this.
> > 
> > 
> > >RHEL is stable (if you use the supported kernel), and GFS 6.0 for RHEL
> > >is stable.  If you are using anything else, it is not stable.  Why is
> > >that so hard to understand?
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > Perhaps because for non-redhat users, 2.4 is considered "old hat" and
> > they can't understand why Redhat is *still* using 2.4 (?!)
> 
> RHEL is using a 2.4 kernel because that is what they chose to make
> stable. You are on a RedHat mailing list discussing a RedHat product.
> Thousands of customers running Oracle on RHEL 3 AS are quite happy
> that RedHat is using a 2.4.21 kernel (as an example).  They are also
> happy that RedHat is making GFS 6.0 available for the RHEL 3 product
> line. 
> 
> > 
> > 
> > >The 2.6 Kernel is stable ... however, it is not stable (or supported) on
> > >RHEL ... and the code GFS code for the 2.6 kernel is not recommended for
> > >use on a production machine with a 2.6 kernel.  Use the GFS code for the
> > >2.6 kernel on a production machine at your own risk.
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > Urm, I guess I don't "have" to use 2.6, but it would be "really" painful
> > for me not to use 2.6 .. for way more reasons than I want to list here.
> 
> Use whatever you want ... only don't expect software that someone says
> is unstable to be stable.  IF you want a stable GFS from RedHat ...
> use RHEL and GFS 6.  If you want to use another distro and another
> GFS ... great ... just don't complain that it is not stable. 
> 
> > 
> > 
> > >At least that is what I got out of the posts ... maybe I'm wrong though
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > Sure, thought you should appreciate that for people who've been off 2.4
> > and in production on 2.6 for a long time, comments like "you should be
> > using 2.4" are a little redundant.
> 
> Again ... you are the person who chooses what technology you
> deploy ... but RedHat is going to put out stable products for their
> supported RHEL.  If you can make it work on a different distro with a
> different kernel, great. 
> 
> > 
> > Regards,
> > Gareth.
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > Johnny Hughes
> > HughesJR.com <http://www.hughesjr.com>  	
> 
> Johnny Hughes

-- 
Gareth Bult <Gareth at Bult.co.uk>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/linux-cluster/attachments/20040711/1a53b4de/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/linux-cluster/attachments/20040711/1a53b4de/attachment.sig>