That's absolutely what is planned. The idea for global replicas involves three basic pieces:
1) A separate replication network 2) Exposing a new tier of uniqueness (the "region") in the ring management tools 3) Implementing proxy affinity so that a proxy server chooses closer replicas rather than more distant ones The first two are simple and already have much of the infrastructure in place. The third is a little more tricky. We will probably also need the ability to increase or decrease the cluster's replica count to make this useful to more deployers. --John On Nov 1, 2012, at 9:49 AM, Alejandro Comisario <[email protected]> wrote: > John, what i think would be terrific ( i hope is not implemented, if not im > gonna feel a dunce ) if, for latency matters, suppose you have 4 zones, 2 on > each datacenter, and on each datacenter, you have 2 proxies for example. > > De idea would be that there were some kind of mechanism to tell the ring, > what nodes are under what proxies, to give some kind of prefferece regarding > latency, and for example not having a proxy on DC1 to cross the country to > get an object from a datanode in DC2. > > Have you thought anything like it? > If not, im wondering how, for example rackspace handles this kind of issues ( > ignoring all the CDN thing ) > > Cheers. > > --------------- > Alejandrito > > On Thu, Nov 1, 2012 at 12:55 PM, John Dickinson <[email protected]> wrote: > This is already supported in Swift with the concept of availability zones. > Swift will place each replica in different availability zones, if possible. > If you only have one zone, Swift will place the replicas on different > machines. If you only have one machine, Swift will place the replicas on > different drives. > > There are active discussions right now about how Swift can support a tier > above these availability zones: "regions". A region would be defined by a > hogher latency link and can provide additional data durability, and, > depending on your deployment details, better availability. > http://swiftstack.com/blog/2012/09/16/globally-distributed-openstack-swift-cluster/ > has more info on the ideas we're talking about. > > --John > > > > > On Nov 1, 2012, at 8:45 AM, Leandro Reox <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Hi guys, > > > > Any plans to implement something like hadoop rack-awareness where we can > > define "rack" spaces to guarantee that a copy of an object is stored for > > example on another datacenter, on another coast. Or should this be managed > > by container sync to the other datacenter > > > > I think that this can be a nice-to-have feature, i dont know if its on the > > dev roadmap > > > > Best > > Lean > > _______________________________________________ > > Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openstack > > Post to : [email protected] > > Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openstack > > More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp > > > _______________________________________________ > Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openstack > Post to : [email protected] > Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openstack > More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp > >
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
_______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openstack Post to : [email protected] Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openstack More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
