[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TS-1728?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13631366#comment-13631366
]
Leif Hedstrom commented on TS-1728:
-----------------------------------
I don't know for sure, but I don't think a RAM cache only solution works for
them. They have a very large amount of content, and (I think?) 20-40TB of disk
in each cache box. This proposal is a way to control (via configs and plugins)
which contents has priority. It's a neat solution IMO, but not as generic as
TS-745. In either case, i always felt it lacking that you can't control which
disks a "volume" occupies, I can see plenty of use cases where I want to use
expensive (say 15k SAS or SSD) for some content, and less expensive disks for
content I care less about (e.g. where high latencies is fine).
I understand the complication of combining TS-745 and TS-1728. This is also why
I'm being a jerk and insisting that we make one config format for all disk /
tiered caches control. Even if it means that for example tiered caching takes
precedence over the volume identification, it's still a hell of lot clearer
where this gets configured.
Phil, James, Jan, John? Any thoughts on this?
> Need a way to assign storage entries to volumes
> -----------------------------------------------
>
> Key: TS-1728
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TS-1728
> Project: Traffic Server
> Issue Type: Wish
> Components: Cache
> Reporter: Jan van Doorn
> Assignee: Phil Sorber
> Priority: Minor
> Fix For: 3.3.2
>
> Attachments: vol.patch
>
>
> See http://www.knutsel.com/vol/compare/ for a write up and some test results
> on this. We are proposing a simple way to hard link storage.config entries to
> volume.config and thus hosting.config entries.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
