[Linux-cluster] GFS and GFS2 : two questions: which is bettter; gfs_controld error

Nick Couchman Nick.Couchman at seakr.com
Sat Sep 1 22:17:27 UTC 2007

In my opinion, GFS2 is still not stable enough for production use.  GFS2 is designed to be better than GFS, but still lacks some stability.  GFS2 has better support for certain features (extended attributes, for example), and is supposed to perform better.
You can start with a GFS filesystem, then use the gfs2_convert utility when GFS2 becomes stable to move to GFS2.

>>> On 2007/09/01 at 04:50:27, "Ian Brown" <ianbrn at gmail.com> wrote:
  - Hello,
   I had installed RHEL5 on two x86_64 machine on the same LAN; afterwards I
   had installed the RHEL5 cluster suite packege (cman-2.0.60-1.el5) and

   I had also installed kmod-gfs-0.1.16- and gfs-utils
and gfs2-utils.

   I had crated a 2-node cluster and started the cman service OK on both nodes.

   Now I tried to create a gfs partition with gfs_mkfs (with -p lock_dlm)
   and mount it, and I got errors when trying to mount it (this errors
talk about

   I made a second try with mkfs.gfs2 (also with -p lock_dlm) );
   this time I **could** mounted the gfs2 partition succesfully.

   My questions are:

     - should I be able with this installation to create and mount a gfs
     partition ? in case this is possible - what can be my mistale ?

     - is gfs2 considered safe to work with ? or is it still experimental and
     not recommended ? which features do I have in GFS2 which I don't have in


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/linux-cluster/attachments/20070901/2c2e1782/attachment.htm>

More information about the Linux-cluster mailing list