zookeeper-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Manosiz Bhattacharyya <manos...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Timeouts and ping handling
Date Thu, 19 Jan 2012 01:47:48 GMT
I was not indicating that we do not detect the situation of a stuck server.
A watchdog of some sort keeping track of queue changes could also suffice.
Thanks for you input. I guess we will try to work out with the increasing
the timeout.

-- Manosiz.

On Wed, Jan 18, 2012 at 4:54 PM, Ted Dunning <ted.dunning@gmail.com> wrote:

> That really depends on whether you think that a stuck server is a problem.
>  The primary indication of that is a full queue and you are suggesting that
> we not detect this situation.  It isn't a matter of keeping the session
> alive ... it is a matter of whether or not we can guarantee that things are
> working.  By all appearances, they aren't and ZK is all about guarantees.
> On Thu, Jan 19, 2012 at 12:47 AM, Manosiz Bhattacharyya
> <manosizb@gmail.com>wrote:
> > We were trying to qualify the requests into two types - either HB's or
> > normal requests. Isn't it better to reject normal requests if the queue
> > size is full to say a certain threshold, but keep the session alive. That
> > way the flow control can be achieved with the users session retrying the
> > operation, but the session health would be maintained.
> >
> >

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