Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe.
I'm always frustrated when existing containers can't be stretched to more nodes if needed. Consider a REP 3 CBF 3 container growing from 1TB to 1PB of data, it can easily fit into nine nodes initially, but with 1 PB that's more than 100 TB per node, depending on hardware setup this might be impossible to do.
Describe the solution you'd like
Add some way to have flexible CBF, like magic number in the policy (0?) and an additional attribute that can be changed. Nodes can change for a container and we know the number of them can shrink/extend normally. In that sense changing the CBF seems to be fine if the placement policy is fixed otherwise.
Describe alternatives you've considered
I don't see any.
Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe.
I'm always frustrated when existing containers can't be stretched to more nodes if needed. Consider a REP 3 CBF 3 container growing from 1TB to 1PB of data, it can easily fit into nine nodes initially, but with 1 PB that's more than 100 TB per node, depending on hardware setup this might be impossible to do.
Describe the solution you'd like
Add some way to have flexible CBF, like magic number in the policy (0?) and an additional attribute that can be changed. Nodes can change for a container and we know the number of them can shrink/extend normally. In that sense changing the CBF seems to be fine if the placement policy is fixed otherwise.
Describe alternatives you've considered
I don't see any.