Mailing-List: contact user-help@zookeeper.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: user@zookeeper.apache.org
Received-SPF: neutral (athena.apache.org: local policy)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: 
 <CAJwFCa28iBL7EU-_cERUhMJ+Jcb5VLF7+woRJu=H7+y0u+bCjg@mail.gmail.com>
References: 
 <CAP1VaJsvFPR8vwopcueoqH6zr_gVw98aZK1=dqWSrR6Q+EvcLg@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAC1AeKyi9ZDetuuYqxSB9OdUNYcP=tCyhnzGzTKdRKZOeyvCNw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAJwFCa28iBL7EU-_cERUhMJ+Jcb5VLF7+woRJu=H7+y0u+bCjg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 17 Sep 2012 20:46:08 -0700
Message-ID: 
 <CAC1AeKwoX7=yobpNgEk+xNOHFHraAjLuDU99_x6afXnTtKTkiA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Millions of opened connections to Zookeeper cluster possible?
From: Morris Bernstein <morris@systems-deployment.com>
To: user@zookeeper.apache.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=e89a8ff1cb9a07eb5c04c9f1bb6e

--e89a8ff1cb9a07eb5c04c9f1bb6e
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

Uhm, yeah, that's what I meant...
On Sep 17, 2012 7:59 PM, "Ted Dunning" <ted.dunning@gmail.com> wrote:

> Another option is to use a proxy.
>
> On Mon, Sep 17, 2012 at 6:44 PM, Morris Bernstein <
> morris@systems-deployment.com> wrote:
>
> > The obvious solution would be running multiple Zookeepers hierarchically.
> > Each server would take, say, 1000 clients.  Each server would be a client
> > of an uber Zookeeper.  It'll increase latency some, but it scales.
> > On Sep 17, 2012 3:57 PM, "Martin Kou" <bitanarch@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Hi all,
> > >
> > > I'm having a use case where there're potentially millions of client
> > > processes connected to a Zookeeper cluster, but only a very small
> > > proportion of them would be actively sending requests or receiving any
> > data
> > > (say, about 1000 of them every second) at any time. Has anyone tried
> this
> > > before?
> > >
> > > Best Regards,
> > > Martin Kou
> > >
> >
>

--e89a8ff1cb9a07eb5c04c9f1bb6e--