[BNM] GFS

[Quentin North (noisy)]

I stand corrected. This is intriguing to me as RH made me go out a  
buy the very expensive advance server subscription in order to be  
licensed for GFS. Perhaps it is open source but not under GPL? Or  
maybe this is new in the opensource versions.

Aha! The product feature matrix for RHEL5 lists Storage  
virtualization (with Red Hat GFS and Cluster Suite) as only available  
with RH Advanced Platform, a premium subscription. It seems if you  
want support, you have to cough up, and if you are running mission  
critical systems with GFS, I would want support. http:// 
www.redhat.com/rhel/compare/

Cheers!


On 29 Oct 2008, at 12:00, bnmlist-request at brightonnewmedia.org wrote:

> Date: Wed, 29 Oct 2008 10:36:25 +0000
> From: David Pashley <david at davidpashley.com>
> Subject: Re: [BNM] fs mirroring on Linux
> To: Brighton New Media <bnmlist at brightonnewmedia.org>
> Message-ID: <20081029103625.GF29696 at femme.catnip.org.uk>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>
> On Oct 28, 2008 at 19:37, Quentin North (noisy) praised the llamas  
> by saying:
>> GFS is probably the best way to go. It is essentially a clustered
>> filesystem, and as such is synchronous. However, it is only available
>> with RHEL Enterprise Advanced server and is complicated to set up.
>> This is a expensive subscription. GFS is not open source (although an
>> early version was, it has been significantly enhanced by RH as a
>> premium product). You wont find it in CentOs.
>>
>>
> Redhat seem to think GFS is opensourced and wikipedia seems to think
> it's in CentOS and Fedora.
>
> http://www.redhat.com/gfs/
>
> As pointed out, OCFS2 and Lustre are freely available alternatives