Since it's a new install I will probably try 2.4, I'm still waiting for some hardware to start testing on.
On Thu, Jun 13, 2013 at 4:59 PM, John Richards <john.richa...@icecube.wisc.edu> wrote: > There may be useful information on lustre.org, but "up to date > documentation" isn't it. > > The "Lustre Operations Manual" link on there points to > > http://wiki.lustre.org/manual/LustreManual20_HTML/index.html > > which is not helpful - the differences between that documentation and > current documentation caused some confusion for our organization's recent > discussions about upgrading to Lustre 2. Specifically wording in the > beginning of > > http://wiki.lustre.org/manual/LustreManual20_HTML/UpgradingLustre.html > > "Note - Lustre 1.8 clients support a mix of 1.8 and 2.0 OSTs, not all OSSs > need to be upgraded at the same time" > > versus > > http://build.whamcloud.com/job/lustre-manual/lastSuccessfulBuild/artifact/lustre_manual.xhtml#upgradinglustre > > "Note - Lustre 1.8 clients can interoperate with 2.x servers, but the > servers should all be upgraded at the same time." > > Even if the lustre.org documentation is correct for Lustre 2.0, I don't > think anyone recommends upgrading to that version right now. > > John > john.richa...@icecube.wisc.edu > > > On Jun 13, 2013, at 01:44 , Akam <azurelus...@gmail.com> wrote: > > The volume of information present on lustre.org is *huge* and "very > helpful". > > Off course an update w.r.t. current development would be great. > _and_ keeping everything at one place would be nice. > > > On Thu, Jun 13, 2013 at 5:18 AM, Christopher J. Morrone <morro...@llnl.gov> > wrote: >> >> Kevin, >> >> I don't think that something that might happen in the future changes the >> accuracy of my statement. >> >> Chris >> >> On 06/12/2013 01:06 PM, P. Kevin Canady wrote: >> > Nor exactly accurate we are discussing with the EOFS and openSFS boards >> > to update lustre.org >> > >> > Sent from my iPhone >> > >> > On Jun 12, 2013, at 11:16 AM, "Christopher J. Morrone" >> > <morro...@llnl.gov> wrote: >> > >> >> On 06/12/2013 04:59 AM, E.S. Rosenberg wrote: >> >> >> >>> Is lustre.org not being maintained anymore? >> >> >> >> Not as far as I can tell. >> >> >> >> The Lustre community has moved to using the OpenSFS Lustre portal >> >> instead: >> >> >> >> http://lustre.opensfs.org >> >> >> >> Chris >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> >> Lustre-discuss mailing list >> >> Lustre-discuss@lists.lustre.org >> >> http://lists.lustre.org/mailman/listinfo/lustre-discuss >> > >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Lustre-discuss mailing list >> Lustre-discuss@lists.lustre.org >> http://lists.lustre.org/mailman/listinfo/lustre-discuss > > > > > -- > cheers > Akam > _______________________________________________ > Lustre-discuss mailing list > Lustre-discuss@lists.lustre.org > http://lists.lustre.org/mailman/listinfo/lustre-discuss > > > > _______________________________________________ > Lustre-discuss mailing list > Lustre-discuss@lists.lustre.org > http://lists.lustre.org/mailman/listinfo/lustre-discuss > _______________________________________________ Lustre-discuss mailing list Lustre-discuss@lists.lustre.org http://lists.lustre.org/mailman/listinfo/lustre-discuss