[Pacemaker] future of DLM

[Lars Marowsky-Bree]

On 2013-02-28T23:21:00, "Lentes, Bernd" <bernd.lentes at helmholtz-muenchen.de> wrote:

> Hi,
> 
> no matter which of the two i choose ?

The question is - choose for what? Depending on what you want to do,
there is no alternative.

Basically, the only use case for OCFS2's internal DLM is if you want to
use OCFS2 without Pacemaker/corosync/cman. For example on SLE HA, that
is not generally supported (only for use with RAC).

Both GFS2 (always) and OCFS2 (when integrated with Pacemaker) require
fs/dlm. Same is true for cLVM2.

If you want to use a DLM yourself, libdlm user-space also requires
fs/dlm. OCFS2's DLM is special-purpose for, well, OCFS2.

I'm sure Oracle will continue to maintain OCFS2's DLM too, but there's
not so much choice as you think there is ;-)


Regards,
    Lars

-- 
Architect Storage/HA
SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, GF: Jeff Hawn, Jennifer Guild, Felix Imendörffer, HRB 21284 (AG Nürnberg)
"Experience is the name everyone gives to their mistakes." -- Oscar Wilde