zookeeper-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Mahadev Konar <maha...@hortonworks.com>
Subject Re: zookeeper ensemble with hbase (versus single node)
Date Fri, 11 Nov 2011 16:50:48 GMT
Koert,
 I think this is a more appropriate question for the HBase mailing
list. HBase uses ZooKeeper for Master failover. It is possible that if
the Master is down and namenode/others are up, HBase can failiover to
the new master. You have a good point of having ZK running on
Master/NN/SNN, so you'd have to avoid running ZK on those machines.
Hope that helps.

mahadev

On Fri, Nov 11, 2011 at 7:15 AM, Koert Kuipers <koert@tresata.com> wrote:
> in various places i have read that in production one should really have a
> zookeeper ensemble (with an odd number of members) as opposed to a single
> zookeeper. this was also mentioned for example in the base documentation.
> however, if your cluster has a single machine with namenode, secondary
> namenode and hbase master, what is the benefit of having a zookeeper
> cluster? if that one machine goes down your hbase isn't doing anything
> anyhow, so why even bother running a zookeeper ensemble in this case? why
> not just use a single zookeeper?
>
> are the performance benefits a reason to run a zookeeper ensemble even in
> this scenario? (faster reads perhaps)
>

Mime
View raw message