zookeeper-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ted Dunning <ted.dunn...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Question about Clustered Setup in two data centers
Date Wed, 02 Mar 2011 22:57:55 GMT
A variant is to keep the tie-breaker in EC2.  That can be made fairly
secure, especially if all you are hosting is status information.

On Wed, Mar 2, 2011 at 2:51 PM, Zsolt Beothy-Elo <zbeothy-elo@talend.com>wrote:

>
> Am 02.03.2011 um 18:56 schrieb Jesse Kempf:
>
> > Hi Zsolt,
> >
> > If the customer has a computer room at their headquarters, you could keep
> two ZKs in each datacenter and a fifth ZK at their HQ. In that case you
> could lose a datacenter and still have quorum.
>
> Running such an infrastructure service outside one of the data centers of
> course violates almost every policy (security, backup,...) that is in place
> at the customer.  But we also had the idea :) And as Ritesh states computer
> at headquarter would likely become the bottleneck. Connection between
> centers is fast and reliable under almost all circumstances.
>
> Zsolt
>
> >
> > Cheers,
> > -Jesse
> >
> > On Mar 2, 2011, at 2:57 PM, Zsolt Beothy-Elo wrote:
> >
> >> Hi all,
> >> in our product we currently implement to use ZooKeeper in conjunction
> with CXF to dynamically manage available services and endpoints.
> Unfortunately one of our customers is not very happy of having to run a
> minimum of three ZooKeeper server instances to ensure fail over. The
> customer has two data centers in different locations where data and
> applications are replicated and some big-ip appliance in front of the data
> centers. If one data center fails everything must still be operable. So he
> would prefer to only have two  instances one in each data center. I would be
> grateful for some advise how to best cope with these contradicting
> requirements.
> >>
> >> Cheers,
> >> Zsolt Beothy-Elo
> >
>
>

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