Date: Wed, 9 Jan 2008 08:23:55 -0500 (EST) From: Andrew Gallatin <gallatin@cs.duke.edu> To: =?UTF-8?B?6Z+T5a625qiZIEJpbGwgSGFja2Vy?= <askbill@conducive.net> Cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: ZFS honesty Message-ID: <18308.51970.859622.363321@grasshopper.cs.duke.edu> In-Reply-To: <47818E97.8030601@conducive.net> References: <fll63b$j1c$1@ger.gmane.org> <20080106141157.I105@fledge.watson.org> <flr0np$euj$2@ger.gmane.org> <47810DE3.3050106@FreeBSD.org> <flr3iq$of7$1@ger.gmane.org> <478119AB.8050906@FreeBSD.org> <47814160.4050401@samsco.org> <4781541D.6070500@conducive.net> <flrlib$j29$1@ger.gmane.org> <47815D29.2000509@conducive.net> <1199664196.899.10.camel@RabbitsDen> <47818E97.8030601@conducive.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
=?UTF-8?B?6Z+T5a625qiZIEJpbGwgSGFja2Vy?= writes: > > OTOH that's all GPFS is. > > Far more features than that - 'robust', 'fault tolerant', 'Disaster Recovery' > ... all the usual buzzwords. > > And nothing prevents using 'cluster' tools on a single box. Not storage-wise anyway. Having had the misfortune of being involved in a cluster which used GPFS, I can attest that GPFS is anything but "robust" and "fault tolerant" in my experience. Granted this was a few years ago, and things may have improved, but that one horrible experience was sufficient to make me avoid GPFS for life. Drew
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?18308.51970.859622.363321>