On 8/1/07, DeeDee Park <deedee6905@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > The idea I have is that I want to use as many available commodity parts > >that > > > I can find and > > > build a largest file server for my customer's needs and reallocating the > > > remaining space for > > > replicas. I still have a lot of these 120GB drives sitting around from a > >few > > > years ago, and I've > > > got 500/750GB drives. It seems to be a difficult task to match each > >120GB > > > drive with another > > > 120GB drive to optimize disk usage for AFR purposes. I could have 2 > >500GB > > > drives for > > > replication *:2, but if I want to move to *:3 in the future, most likely > > > I'll have some 750GB > > > drives laying around. Using a 750GB as my third brick would most likely > > > waste the remaining 250GB. > > > >You can just put the bigger drive brick as the first subvolume in the > >subvolume > >list. This should fix the problem right? > > Yes, it would give the user more space, but wouldn't there be some kind of > error > message when the replica disk runs out of space once the primary 750GB > contains > more than 250GB of data? Once the user exceeds 250GB, then they no longer > have a replica (false sense of security... bad). > That would be disk space management issue which the admin should take care of and AFR should not worry about. When we come up with a web management interface the admin should automatically know what disks have reached critical stage. For now though he should manually monitor the disk space. Regards Krishna
