From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Mykola Golub Subject: Re: Pool setting for recovery priority Date: Tue, 29 Sep 2015 21:47:42 +0300 Message-ID: <20150929184741.GA19934@gmail.com> References: <20150921133218.GB23240@gmail.com> <20150925114440.GA30636@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from mail-la0-f52.google.com ([209.85.215.52]:34793 "EHLO mail-la0-f52.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S935252AbbI2Srq (ORCPT ); Tue, 29 Sep 2015 14:47:46 -0400 Received: by labzv5 with SMTP id zv5so19898713lab.1 for ; Tue, 29 Sep 2015 11:47:44 -0700 (PDT) Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: ceph-devel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: GuangYang Cc: Weil Sage , Mykola Golub , "sjust@redhat.com" , "ceph-devel@vger.kernel.org" , David Zafman On Tue, Sep 29, 2015 at 10:23:54AM -0700, GuangYang wrote: > I sort of misunderstood the pain point here, I thought we wanted to > simplify from CLI side to set those parameters as we have more and > more pool level setting, not from an internal implementation's > perspective.. > > Thanks Mykola for implementing this, I will rebase the priority > setting stuff against it. Ah, so you are working on adding per pool priority options? Because I have just started working on this too, but if you already do this I will abandon it. -- Mykola Golub