From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Mark Kampe Subject: Re: Client Location Date: Tue, 09 Oct 2012 09:43:28 -0700 Message-ID: <50745430.6090607@inktank.com> References: <1467968321.440.1349788446710.JavaMail.root@corellia.pncl.co.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from mail-pb0-f46.google.com ([209.85.160.46]:65133 "EHLO mail-pb0-f46.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751373Ab2JIQnf (ORCPT ); Tue, 9 Oct 2012 12:43:35 -0400 Received: by mail-pb0-f46.google.com with SMTP id rr4so5390822pbb.19 for ; Tue, 09 Oct 2012 09:43:35 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <1467968321.440.1349788446710.JavaMail.root@corellia.pncl.co.uk> Sender: ceph-devel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: James Horner Cc: ceph-devel@vger.kernel.org I'm not a real engineer, so please forgive me if I misunderstand, but can't you create a separate rule for each data center (choosing first a local copy, and then remote copies), which should ensure that the primary is always local. Each data center would then use a different pool, associated with the appropriate location- sensitive rule. Does this approach get you the desired locality preference?