@cdfgallo , this sounds like more than one feature/enhancement request. Are you working on these? If not, and to enhance the chance of those getting implemented, can you split them and expand with screen shots/depiction of the desired situation.

@DaanHoogland you are right, this is an enhancement request.
Ok, I will split them.

Ty,
Fabio

Not sure but could Flexible Tags functionality help in achieving a preferred pool allocation, @JoaoJandre?

Hello @cdfgallo @shwstppr,

You could use flexible tags to finely choose which hosts receive which VMs and the same with storages and volumes. You can make rules to specifically allow only certain groups of tags into each host/storage. You can read a little more about tags and flexible tags in the documentation. Let me know if you do not understand the docs, and have further questions about flexible tags; I can try to answer them.

However, if you only want preferred and not exclusive hosts/storages, regular tags would do just fine as well.

@JoaoJandre I don't have much idea about flexible tags. Can you provide an example rule of how someone can use flexible tags in a way similar to preferred.storage.pool but per zone or cluster instead of an account?

Hi @cdfgallo @JoaoJandre @DaanHoogland @shwstppr @vishesh92 I was investigating a bit about this issue:

• For the first part, users are able to choose the prefered pools by overriding the root disk offering (pre-created by an admin, which can contain storage tags matching the storage pools) during the VM creation. This is already possible, what are your suggestions to extend this functionality?
• Currently the preferred.storage.pool setting is granular to accounts, I can draft a PR changing its scope to Zone (or Cluster) and do some testing

@JoaoJandre I don't have much idea about flexible tags. Can you provide an example rule of how someone can use flexible tags in a way similar to preferred.storage.pool but per zone or cluster instead of an account?

@vishesh92, @nvazquez Sorry for the delayed response, after taking a proper look at the way that the preferred.storage.pool config works, simulating it with tags is somewhat painful. I think that extending the config to zone/cluster scope is an easier approach.