Scale-out: Move replica meta to dedicated repos?

[pkelly_sts]

I'm now starting to look at migrating to scale-out repositories & am aware that they can't contain replica metadata (RM).

I'm thinking it might be worth me just creating some dedicated RM repositories which would actually just be folders on the same physical disks as the "primary" repositories sit anyway, that way they should never "get in the way" of scale-out repository configs.

Any non-obvious consequences of me making such a change?

[foggy]

Paul, this is the right step before migrating to scale-out repos.

[pkelly_sts]

Thanks for confirmation, good to know I'm on the right track!

[pkelly_sts]

Another Scale out question: Is it reasonable to state that if a scale out repository is only backed by two simple repositories & configured for "Performance" (with a primary justification being to speed up transform operations) then there is less of a benefit of using per-vm backup chains, because even parallel backup tasks would be limited to the job concurrency of each simple repository anyway?

However I can see that a large site (or particularly distributed storage availability) would perhaps get more benefit due to the capability of running parallel jobs to multiple physical storage devices fronted by a Scale out repository?

[foggy]

Depends on the underline storage. The max number of concurrent tasks will not change with enabling per-VM chains, but the number of parallel streams writing these tasks will. If the storage ingestion rate within a single stream is limited, increasing the number of streams by enabling per-VM chains will result in better performance with the same amount of max concurrent tasks.