On Wed, May 15, 2013 at 2:06 PM, Mandell Degerness <mandell@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > I have used the examples on the website to make fast, slow, and mixed > pools. What I'd like to be able to do, but which I fear may not be > possible, is to have a mixed storage rule such that: > > primary copy goes to fast disk > secondary copies go to slow disk > primary and secondary are never on the same host, even if the host has > fast and slow OSDs defined. > > My initial cut basically just added secondary root and duplicate(with > addition of "slow") hostnames and the OSD was assigned to one or the > other of the hosts. This removes the ability of the selector tell that > the primary and copy are on the same host, however. > > Any ideas? Do I need to wait for the more complex crush behavior > promised down the line? Unfortunately, I think you need to wait. This is one of the motivating/example use cases for the CRUSH extension blueprint. -Greg Software Engineer #42 @ http://inktank.com | http://ceph.com _______________________________________________ ceph-users mailing list ceph-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com
 |