EG OSX has a memory leak that requires weekly rebooting (per apple support)
On Sunday, June 21, 2015, Harald Barth <h...@kth.se> wrote: > > > I do not believe that the OpenAFS mailing lists are an appropriate forum > > to discuss AuriStor. My response to Michael provided details on > > AuriStor because I felt it was necessary in order to properly answer the > > implied questions. > > What I've learned so far from AuriStor it looks like it could be a > replacement for OpenAFS on the platforms it's available. And it can > more as Jeff tells us. If that strategy is good advertising depends > on "cultural background". > > > The question of "supported platforms" is an interesting one because it > > is very unclear what it means for OpenAFS to "support" a platform. What > > are the criteria? Is it sufficient to say that if you can build OpenAFS > > on the OS and hardware architecture that it is "supported"? > > Sorry, "supported" was probably a bad choice of word. But I don't know > if "availabe" or "runable" or "it builds it ships" would be better. > > > I am quite sure there are other criteria that could be added to the mix. > > I know that you take "supported" very seriously. I would be happy if > other software vendors (which are not into file systems) would do that > as well. > > > * Linux > > . Red Hat Enterprise Linux > > (YFSI is a Red Hat Technology Partner) > > . Fedora > > . Debian > > . Ubuntu > > * Microsoft Windows > > * Apple OSX and iOS > > * Oracle Solaris > > * IBM AIX > > * Android > > > > Servers are supported everywhere but on Windows, iOS and Android but the > > performance varies significantly based upon the OS release, processor > > architecture, and underlying hardware so there are combinations that we > > recommend and those we do not. > > > > The failure to list an OS family or Linux distribution does not imply > > that YFSI will not support AuriStor on that platform. It only implies > > that there has been insufficient customer interest to this point for > > YFSI to expend the necessary resources on development, testing and > > certification (where applicable.) > > Thanks for the list. I guess on "the main HW" which is amd64 for most > of the OSes above. Both at work and privately I run OpenAFS on > platforms that are not on the list and even in the future will not > have much "customer interest". > > > In the end software development has to be a partnership between those > > that build and those that deploy. If those that deploy do not fund > > those that build there will not be sufficient development hours and > > talent to build the solutions those that deploy require. > > I see that this partnership has stopped working in many places. It > makes me sad. > > > P.S. My apologies for the long reply. > > You don't need to apologise. > > Harald. > _______________________________________________ > OpenAFS-info mailing list > OpenAFS-info@openafs.org <javascript:;> > https://lists.openafs.org/mailman/listinfo/openafs-info >
