Mailing-List: contact user-help@zookeeper.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: user@zookeeper.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of hbkrichards@gmail.com
 designates 209.85.192.181 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <EE4C98AF-6A6D-416B-B28E-FDD85F3B2E5B@yahoo.com>
References: 
 <CANMELZvdpt1k50a94z5-ZhsEmH30sGr+iPZbe7wo8PNjqZh_kQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<EE4C98AF-6A6D-416B-B28E-FDD85F3B2E5B@yahoo.com>
Date: Wed, 29 May 2013 18:01:40 +0530
Message-ID: 
 <CANMELZu3OE6Nip2p3M8cUCPAYedebGALPf4nG7JK6nDmPJP8UA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Clarification regarding maxClientCnxns parameter
From: Richards Peter <hbkrichards@gmail.com>
To: user@zookeeper.apache.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=047d7bf0d4124b702704ddda90e9

--047d7bf0d4124b702704ddda90e9
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

Hi all,

Thanks for your replies.

I will try to describe my setting in very simple terms. Assume that I have
n machines running m number of JVMs each. Each JVM would connect to
zookeeper cluster(having 3 servers currently) to maintain some state
information. In this case would you recommend me to restrict maxClientCnxns
to m?

Initially I was thinking that zookeeper cluster is keeping a kind of state
replica in all the machines. But when I read about the description of
maxClientCnxns, I felt that it is not replica which is stored in zookeeper.
Each client connection could go to a different zookeeper server. So I
wanted to confirm whether the clients would connect in a load balanced
fashion.

Since clients connect randomly to any server, would it lead to increased
loads on some servers than the others?

Thanks,
Richards.

--047d7bf0d4124b702704ddda90e9--