@olivierlambert said: I'm not sure it's a great idea, because even 64 hosts is huge in terms of VMs and fallout if you have a problem on your pool DB. Even if you drastically improve the current mechanism, the impact of a problem pool wide is far bigger with 64 hosts than 24 for example. It's more than purely tech, it's also a tech design/choice. We can stick with the 64 hosts per pool, was just wondering how far it could stretch!