Chip, Why do we have a region entity in the database if everything is assumed to be one and only region?
Thanks, -John On Jul 19, 2013, at 4:34 PM, Chip Childers <chip.child...@sungard.com> wrote: > On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 4:31 PM, John Burwell <jburw...@basho.com> wrote: > >> Chip, >> >> So two regions won't share the same database? >> > > Nope, that's why you have to use something (not provided yet) to sync the > acct / domain metadata between them. > > >> >> Thanks, >> -John >> >> On Jul 19, 2013, at 4:06 PM, Chip Childers <chip.child...@sungard.com> >> wrote: >> >>> On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 03:46:36PM -0400, John Burwell wrote: >>>> All, >>>> >>>> In reviewing the 4.2 object store enhancements, object stores are >> defined with region scope. However, there is no way to assign an object >> store definition to a region. To my way of thinking, we must be able to >> assign an object store to a region to avoid transfer of large assets across >> WAN links. Furthermore, it greatly reduces availability of the object >> store cluster because the management server/ssvm may attempt to connect to >> an object store over a WAN link when co-located instance is available. Why >> isn't assignment of an object store to a region supported? >>>> >>>> Thanks, >>>> -John >>> >>> AFAIK, a management server is only a control point for a single region. >>> The Region entity is used to provide users with a reference to other >>> regions that may be part of the same service. If I'm right, then the >>> locally configured object-store would be for that region only. >>> >>> Other feel free to correct me. >> >> >>
