Opened at 2009-05-20T18:55:57Z
Last modified at 2013-05-22T05:05:48Z
#711 new enhancement
repair to different levels of N — at Version 10
Reported by: | zooko | Owned by: | |
---|---|---|---|
Priority: | major | Milestone: | undecided |
Component: | code-encoding | Version: | 1.4.1 |
Keywords: | repair preservation space-efficiency newcaps research | Cc: | |
Launchpad Bug: |
Description (last modified by daira)
Currently repair will try to create a number of shares equal to whatever number the file was originally created with.
It might be useful to tell repair not to go that far and produce only a few shares.
Change History (10)
comment:1 Changed at 2009-05-20T18:56:43Z by zooko
comment:2 Changed at 2009-08-10T15:28:19Z by zooko
The following clump of tickets might be of interest to people who are interested in this ticket: #711 (repair to different levels of M), #699 (optionally rebalance during repair or upload), #543 ('rebalancing manager'), #232 (Peer selection doesn't rebalance shares on overwrite of mutable file.), #678 (converge same file, same K, different M), #610 (upload should take better advantage of existing shares), #573 (Allow client to control which storage servers receive shares).
comment:3 Changed at 2009-08-10T15:45:28Z by zooko
Also related: #778 ("shares of happiness" is the wrong measure; "servers of happiness" is better).
comment:4 Changed at 2009-12-22T18:49:55Z by davidsarah
- Keywords repair preservation added
comment:5 Changed at 2009-12-22T18:55:29Z by davidsarah
- Keywords space-efficiency added
comment:6 Changed at 2010-07-21T16:13:43Z by zooko
- Keywords newcaps added
comment:7 Changed at 2011-01-27T19:57:17Z by zooko
See new related ticket #1340 (consider share-at-a-time uploader).
comment:8 Changed at 2011-01-29T21:11:09Z by warner
- Summary changed from repair to different levels of M to repair to different levels of N
s/M/N/ to match our existing "k-of-N" terminology
comment:9 Changed at 2013-01-22T14:10:08Z by zooko
- Keywords research added
comment:10 Changed at 2013-05-21T23:54:55Z by daira
- Description modified (diff)
I'm confused, why would we want this? Just to decrease storage requirements?
See also #678 (converge same file, same K, different M), which if implemented would make it also be sensible to tell repair to go further and produce more shares than the original file had.