zookeeper-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ted Dunning <ted.dunn...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: zookeeper cluster spanning datacenters
Date Thu, 22 Sep 2011 19:01:16 GMT
Wow.

Brutal, but effective.

On Thu, Sep 22, 2011 at 10:26 AM, Fournier, Camille F. <
Camille.Fournier@gs.com> wrote:

> We have a monitor process that runs 'stat' against the remote ZK and if it
> returns leader, kills the process.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Damu R [mailto:damu.devnull@gmail.com]
> Sent: Thursday, September 22, 2011 12:47 PM
> To: user@zookeeper.apache.org
> Subject: Re: zookeeper cluster spanning datacenters
>
> Hi Fourier,
>
> We spread our ZKs across 3 data centers and in fact, these data centers are
> > split across global regions (2 or 4 in one region, one in a remote
> region).
> > To keep throughput up (and note that the throughput you have to worry
> about
> > is only write throughput), we always ensure that the master is in one of
> the
> > "local" data centers.
> >
>  How can we make sure the master (leader?) is in the local datacenter? Is
> there any way we can control the leader election?
>
>
> > If you have the machines to test, I would recommend running zk-smoketest
>  (
> > https://github.com/phunt/zk-smoketest) on the proposed config.
> >
> This tool will be very useful to evaluate the setup.
>
> Thanks
> Damu
>
> >
> > C
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Damu R [mailto:damu.devnull@gmail.com]
> > Sent: Thursday, September 22, 2011 10:50 AM
> > To: user@zookeeper.apache.org
> > Subject: zookeeper cluster spanning datacenters
> >
> > Hi,
> > I would like to know the downsides of having a zookeeper cluster that
> spans
> > multiple datacenters. The requirement is a datacenter failure should not
> > bring down the zookeeper cluster. From my understanding it is not
> possible
> > to have a hot/cold cluster kind of setup possible. So we are thinking of
> > putting zk servers in 3 colos(1+1+1 or 2+2+3). One of the major drawback
> I
> > could think of is the throughput of the system affected by latency. The
> > system does not require high throughput and can accept some latency. How
> > much effect will the latency have on the throughput of the system? What
> are
> > the other downsides of spreading the cluster across datacenters?
> >
> > Regards
> > Damu
> >
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message