Yes, native GPFS access can be used by AFM, but only for shorter distances (10s of miles, e.g.). For intercontinental or cross-US distances, the latency would be too high for that protocol so NFS would be recommended. Lyle From: "Marc A Kaplan" <makaplan at us.ibm.com> To: gpfsug main discussion list <gpfsug-discuss at spectrumscale.org> Date: 03/29/2019 03:05 PM Subject: Re: [gpfsug-discuss] A net new cluster Sent by: gpfsug-discuss-bounces at spectrumscale.org I don't know the particulars of the case in question, nor much about ESS rules... But for a vanilla Spectrum Scale cluster -. 1) There is nothing wrong or ill-advised about upgrading software and then creating a new version 5.x file system... keeping any older file systems in place. 2) I thought AFM was improved years ago to support GPFS native access -- need not go through NFS stack...? Whereas your wrote: ... nor is it advisable to try to create a new pool or filesystem in same cluster and then migrate (partially because migrating between filesystems within a cluster with afm would require going through nfs stack afaik) ... _______________________________________________ gpfsug-discuss mailing list gpfsug-discuss at spectrumscale.org https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__gpfsug.org_mailman_listinfo_gpfsug-2Ddiscuss&d=DwICAg&c=jf_iaSHvJObTbx-siA1ZOg&r=IbxtjdkPAM2Sbon4Lbbi4w&m=vngQUjSBYhOMpp8HMi2XWB2feIO7aKGG6UivD0ADm6s&s=PjdyuwVaVKavcSGf9ltOn_k6wRMlka7CYhHzUdSKo5M&e= -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://gpfsug.org/pipermail/gpfsug-discuss_gpfsug.org/attachments/20190401/dd591eb0/attachment.html> -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: graycol.gif Type: image/gif Size: 105 bytes Desc: not available URL: <http://gpfsug.org/pipermail/gpfsug-discuss_gpfsug.org/attachments/20190401/dd591eb0/attachment.gif>
