Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-hadoop-zookeeper-user-archive@minotaur.apache.org Received: (qmail 46936 invoked from network); 8 Mar 2010 13:43:11 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.3) by 140.211.11.9 with SMTP; 8 Mar 2010 13:43:11 -0000 Received: (qmail 83031 invoked by uid 500); 8 Mar 2010 13:42:48 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-hadoop-zookeeper-user-archive@hadoop.apache.org Received: (qmail 83007 invoked by uid 500); 8 Mar 2010 13:42:47 -0000 Mailing-List: contact zookeeper-user-help@hadoop.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: zookeeper-user@hadoop.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list zookeeper-user@hadoop.apache.org Received: (qmail 82999 invoked by uid 99); 8 Mar 2010 13:42:47 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (140.211.11.136) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 08 Mar 2010 13:42:47 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=4.4 required=10.0 tests=FREEMAIL_ENVFROM_END_DIGIT,FREEMAIL_FROM,HTML_MESSAGE,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_PASS,T_TO_NO_BRKTS_FREEMAIL X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of waite.134@googlemail.com designates 72.14.220.155 as permitted sender) Received: from [72.14.220.155] (HELO fg-out-1718.google.com) (72.14.220.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 08 Mar 2010 13:42:46 +0000 Received: by fg-out-1718.google.com with SMTP id d23so1382456fga.11 for ; Mon, 08 Mar 2010 05:42:25 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlemail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:in-reply-to:references :date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; bh=qv8OwabEee3b91Mxn9Bd4dm6JxLymrnTdkbWl/i8jD0=; b=vVVv43kninADHg0qob5MR2SgQVlMmz1plGOUujD3P8cSw7zbTBpWhlCw9A8ETj9Jf3 tDbms6vMRdK620BzWuZrjFdFRvigDZG253FpyjqwW/sp2oVzBi/WwLfSva3RFmd5KotS sNkCfUchkWSzJExXm/sKJV/egTp0RAvhR9GX8= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=googlemail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; b=Ri3LcTiBAECbav8MI9GwuCW2zzMyFr38p/7bfKUD5DAvSApODpZVhiruofWeEh6gtn GDSIa4GjmC8D8TmhxAMaKLGu8hZk8CM05KRPKzaa36hEwKhN9YiOrbok/iTCGkrZxcu3 Iws2Vrj6d1iuOq4Bun1MUyfWdLuWF5H8q6eT4= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.87.65.40 with SMTP id s40mr4800796fgk.14.1268055745177; Mon, 08 Mar 2010 05:42:25 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Mon, 8 Mar 2010 13:42:24 +0000 Message-ID: <8bc75ecf1003080542t410703h28401fa3c05f0cf9@mail.gmail.com> Subject: Re: Managing multi-site clusters with Zookeeper From: Martin Waite To: zookeeper-user@hadoop.apache.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001485f03f7a3f2c9304814a3cdd --001485f03f7a3f2c9304814a3cdd Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Hi Ted, If the links do not work for us for zk, then they are unlikely to work with any other solution - such as trying to stretch Pacemaker or Red Hat Cluster with their multicast protocols across the links. If the links are not good enough, we might have to spend some more money to fix this. regards, Martin On 8 March 2010 02:14, Ted Dunning wrote: > If you can stand the latency for updates then zk should work well for you. > It is unlikely that you will be able to better than zk does and still > maintain correctness. > > Do note that you can, probalbly bias client to use a local server. That > should make things more efficient. > > Sent from my iPhone > > > On Mar 7, 2010, at 3:00 PM, Mahadev Konar wrote: > > The inter-site links are a nuisance. We have two data-centres with 100Mb >>> links which I hope would be good enough for most uses, but we need a 3rd >>> site - and currently that only has 2Mb links to the other sites. This >>> might >>> be a problem. >>> >> --001485f03f7a3f2c9304814a3cdd--