Return-Path: X-Original-To: apmail-zookeeper-user-archive@www.apache.org Delivered-To: apmail-zookeeper-user-archive@www.apache.org Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 427AC748E for ; Mon, 19 Dec 2011 18:29:52 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 83302 invoked by uid 500); 19 Dec 2011 18:29:51 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-zookeeper-user-archive@zookeeper.apache.org Received: (qmail 83268 invoked by uid 500); 19 Dec 2011 18:29:51 -0000 Mailing-List: contact user-help@zookeeper.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: user@zookeeper.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list user@zookeeper.apache.org Received: (qmail 83260 invoked by uid 99); 19 Dec 2011 18:29:51 -0000 Received: from minotaur.apache.org (HELO minotaur.apache.org) (140.211.11.9) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 19 Dec 2011 18:29:51 +0000 Received: from localhost (HELO mail-we0-f170.google.com) (127.0.0.1) (smtp-auth username phunt, mechanism plain) by minotaur.apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 19 Dec 2011 18:29:51 +0000 Received: by wera13 with SMTP id a13so1405274wer.15 for ; Mon, 19 Dec 2011 10:29:49 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.216.131.152 with SMTP id m24mr9078440wei.56.1324319389826; Mon, 19 Dec 2011 10:29:49 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.227.42.211 with HTTP; Mon, 19 Dec 2011 10:29:49 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Mon, 19 Dec 2011 10:29:49 -0800 Message-ID: Subject: Re: connection lost From: Patrick Hunt To: user@zookeeper.apache.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable fyi That linger change was included in 3.3.4 and 3.4.1. Patrick On Mon, Dec 19, 2011 at 8:44 AM, Benjamin Reed wrote: > which version of the server are you using. this sounds like the linger > bug that was fixed a while back. > > ben > > On Sun, Dec 18, 2011 at 6:22 PM, Camille Fournier wr= ote: >> That is not what we would expect from the cluster. What do the server lo= gs show? >> >> On Sun, Dec 18, 2011 at 9:13 PM, =E6=9C=B1=E6=99=A8=E6=9D=B0 wrote: >>> Hi, everyone: >>> =C2=A0 I'm now using Zookeeper as my service server. There are 3 Zookee= per >>> servers, then I use 3 pc connect to them. On each pc there are 20 proce= sses >>> connect to zookeeper cluster so there are totally 60 connection. I >>> terminate 20 processes on one pc simultaneously, then I find the status= of >>> all the 60 connection =C2=A0turned to "disconnected". After a while, th= e living >>> 40 process start re-connect to zookeeper, but they all become "expired"= . I >>> thought the connetion of one client would not affect others, but the re= sult >>> shows it does affect. >>> =C2=A0 So I want to ask: Does it cost a lot for zookeeper to deal with = a lost >>> connnetion? And if too much connection lost at the same time will cause >>> zookeeper deny of service? >>> =C2=A0 Thanks! >>> -- >>> Zhu Chenjie >>> Zhejiang University, China