From owner-freebsd-cluster Tue Dec 10 13:44: 0 2002 Delivered-To: freebsd-cluster@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8F5AA37B401 for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 13:43:58 -0800 (PST) Received: from fubar.adept.org (fubar.adept.org [63.147.172.249]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4937243EA9 for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 13:43:58 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from mike@adept.org) Received: by fubar.adept.org (Postfix, from userid 1001) id 5B99215247; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 13:40:47 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by fubar.adept.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5955915213 for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 13:40:47 -0800 (PST) Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 13:40:47 -0800 (PST) From: Mike Hoskins To: freebsd-cluster@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: sharing files within a cluster In-Reply-To: <20021211025917.A9059@misty.eyesbeyond.com> Message-ID: <20021210132642.N80252-100000@fubar.adept.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-cluster@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Wed, 11 Dec 2002, Greg Lewis wrote: > . PVFS http://www.parl.clemson.edu/pvfs/ > . InterMezzo http://inter-mezzo.org/ Thanks for the reading material. > . GPFS http://www-1.ibm.com/servers/eserver/clusters/software/gpfs.html Anyone used this with Linux? I tend to have faith in Big Blue's engineering practices, in general they hire smart people. > . Lustre http://www.lustre.org/ "The central target in this project is the development of Lustre, a next-generation cluster file system which can serve clusters with 10,000's of nodes, petabytes of storage, move 100's of GB/sec with state of the art security and management infrastructure. The 1.0 release of Lustre will happen early 2002 and will target clusters up to 1,000 nodes with 100'TB's of storage." Quite the claim(s), anyone actually seen it work? > Unfortunately I'd have to agree that Linux has better clustering support > at the moment. That is basically because more people (particularly the > corporations and national labs) are working on cluster support for Linux. Paraphrasing Jossie and the Pussycats (excellent pop culture commentary ;), "Linux is the new Windows." So, indeed, no surprise here. I don't think there's any 'pretty' FreeBSD clustering solution today... Pretty meaning a combination of managability, stability, robustness and correctness. So, moving forward, can we reach a consensus on 'what's best to try to port?' I have to admit I'll be implementing a mini-itx cluster in my garage this summer as a side project and may experiment with NFS, Coda, etc... However, those solutions would not be feasible in my production envrionments. However, once the cluster is up, I'll be more than happy to help some person or group implement and test better solutions. -- Mike Hoskins This message is RFC 1855 compliant, mike@adept.org www.adept.org/~mike/pub/rfcs/rfc1855.html To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-cluster" in the body of the message