[Linux-cluster] GFS vs GFS2

gordan at bobich.net gordan at bobich.net
Wed May 7 12:27:14 UTC 2008

On Wed, 7 May 2008, Steven Whitehouse wrote:

> On Wed, 2008-05-07 at 12:53 +0100, gordan at bobich.net wrote:
>> For some reason, I always worry when people whether something that isn't
>> production ready _REALLY_ isn't production ready, or whether the
>> developers are just saying it isn't production ready for fun...
>> IIRC, the plan was that it will be ready by RHEL5.1, but additional
>> critical bugs were discovered, the fixes for which have, to my
>> knowledge, not made it into the distro yet.
> This issue is that the rules for updating RHEL are that we can't put in
> updates to GFS2 in RHEL 5.1 because GFS2 is a demo feature in 5.1 and we
> don't want to potentially risk adding bugs by fixing unsupported
> features. I know that it seems to have been a long time but, I hope,
> understandably, we are cautious of risking other people's important data
> on the filesystem until we are sure that we've sorted out all the issues
> and have been through extensive testing.

I think you misunderstood - I fully suport the approach you are taking of 
ensuring that RHEL features are totally stable. Those that want to play 
with unstable features always have FC available. :)


More information about the Linux-cluster mailing list