Return-Path: X-Original-To: apmail-zookeeper-user-archive@www.apache.org Delivered-To: apmail-zookeeper-user-archive@www.apache.org Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 61FFA105A4 for ; Thu, 20 Mar 2014 18:24:35 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 39500 invoked by uid 500); 20 Mar 2014 18:24:33 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-zookeeper-user-archive@zookeeper.apache.org Received: (qmail 39356 invoked by uid 500); 20 Mar 2014 18:24:29 -0000 Mailing-List: contact user-help@zookeeper.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: user@zookeeper.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list user@zookeeper.apache.org Received: (qmail 39348 invoked by uid 99); 20 Mar 2014 18:24:28 -0000 Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (192.87.106.230) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 20 Mar 2014 18:24:28 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=2.5 required=5.0 tests=FREEMAIL_REPLY,HTML_MESSAGE,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of ted.dunning@gmail.com designates 209.85.223.180 as permitted sender) Received: from [209.85.223.180] (HELO mail-ie0-f180.google.com) (209.85.223.180) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 20 Mar 2014 18:24:23 +0000 Received: by mail-ie0-f180.google.com with SMTP id as1so1278019iec.25 for ; Thu, 20 Mar 2014 11:24:01 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-type; bh=zSkh6LFyiH8/ynpZPKd7/L/9tpLQbrCYlnXhm47VTZ0=; b=zPFgQdJ7Wo97JerCCYl9lJnjEeKPPkhNYUTGOTR3iAoj++yAnEOCQqA/9yXKXQW/G4 9NcbrSnDoE87vqFdQ5M9jaoaUPT0Lhxi0XgKVmgDO+ZfFtl7BK5BOtBUx3Zg5HKYuF9q RE7KOleqS87QAhV5irCnLIr3GNTis561IaVrR1V4SPWgR0t/T0aEfnkLoTCeLdqwxq2P vEgrSSkaGnWgEtoTEIQU6WRQJHRIuz83pOhY3ez54Gt7I/gNlwPba94104VwdoUqPX9w 4eEex9Pju9kN1C8jioJOfVA5FW21+IN8bnJr4s5sFvV7M05mzzL23KyVjC5yXRoIf6fk YEIw== X-Received: by 10.42.224.194 with SMTP id ip2mr1620836icb.91.1395339841682; Thu, 20 Mar 2014 11:24:01 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.64.225.109 with HTTP; Thu, 20 Mar 2014 11:23:31 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: From: Ted Dunning Date: Thu, 20 Mar 2014 11:23:31 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Best pratice To: "user@zookeeper.apache.org" Cc: michi@cs.stanford.edu Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a1133251e9ac63a04f50ddf7c X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org --001a1133251e9ac63a04f50ddf7c Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Test first without anything all that fancy gear. For all of the applications that you mention except Kafka, the actual transaction rate is near nil. A dedicated single spindle per ZK is likely to be be luxurious accommodation. I doubt seriously that you need SSD's. On Thu, Mar 20, 2014 at 10:14 AM, Software Dev wrote: > I was thinking SSD for zookeeper but traditional for the log directory. > Memory wouldn't be a problem > > > On Wed, Mar 19, 2014 at 11:14 PM, Michi Mutsuzaki >wrote: > > > It should be fine to consolidate so long as these applications don't > > overload the ZooKeeper cluster in terms of memory usage and read/write > > throughput. I would definitely test it first though :) > > > > On Wed, Mar 19, 2014 at 9:57 PM, Software Dev > > > wrote: > > > We currently have 4 separate ZK clusters (hbase, kafka, solr cloud, > > storm) > > > with either 3 or 5 per cluster. Should we combine all clusters into one > > and > > > just serve each one up in their own chroot? > > > --001a1133251e9ac63a04f50ddf7c--