<div dir="ltr"><br><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Tue, May 2, 2017 at 12:04 AM, Gandalf Corvotempesta <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:gandalf.corvotempesta@gmail.com" target="_blank">gandalf.corvotempesta@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><span class="">2017-05-01 20:30 GMT+02:00 Shyam <<a href="mailto:srangana@redhat.com">srangana@redhat.com</a>>:<br>
> Yes, as a matter of fact, you can do this today using the CLI and creating<br>
> nx2 instead of 1x2. 'n' is best decided by you, depending on the growth<br>
> potential of your cluster, as at some point 'n' wont be enough if you grow<br>
> by some nodes.<br>
><br>
> But, when a brick is replaced we will fail to address "(a) ability to retain<br>
> replication/availability levels" as we support only homogeneous replication<br>
> counts across all DHT subvols. (I could be corrected on this when using<br>
> replace-brick though)<br>
<br>
<br>
</span>Yes, but this is error prone.<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>Why?<br> <br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<br>
I'm still thinking that saving (I don't know where, I don't know how)<br>
a mapping between<br>
files and bricks would solve many issues and add much more flexibility.<br>
</blockquote></div><br><br clear="all"><br>-- <br><div class="gmail_signature" data-smartmail="gmail_signature"><div dir="ltr">Pranith<br></div></div>
</div></div>