I don't know of anyone that is interesting on working on that specific feature. What we have been talking about is an automatic migration of objects up and down the storage hierarchy.
Having it write to SSD first could be both good and bad (fast but lots of write wear). > On Mar 21, 2016, at 12:19 PM, Muhammad Faisal <[email protected]> wrote: > > OK. But this feature can be added right? May be in future releases. It can > improve caching performance by avoiding seek time of disks which increase > over the period of time with high disk WR. > -- > Regards, > Faisal. > > > > ------ Original Message ------ > From: "Leif Hedstrom" <[email protected]> > To: [email protected]; "Muhammad Faisal" <[email protected]> > Sent: 3/21/2016 9:52:35 PM > Subject: Re: Different Cache Disk for different size of objects > >> >>> On Mar 18, 2016, at 3:35 AM, Muhammad Faisal <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> Hi, >>> Is this possible to allocate a different disk for different object sizes? >>> Below is the scenario I'm trying to implement: >>> >>> Object size <1MB -----> SSD >>> Object Size > 1MB ----> HDD >>> >>> This will improve Caching performance as smaller objects will be served >>> from SSD while larger objects will reside on the HDD. >> >> >> No, not at this point. Part of the issue is that we select “storage” before >> going to origin, so you don’t know what the size is going to be before you >> get the response. And at that point, you (currently) can’t move to a >> different storage / volume. But @amc would know best. >> >> — leif >> >>
