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 4E59511A35 for ; Tue, 9 Sep 2014 08:04:32 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 6043 invoked by uid 500); 9 Sep 2014 08:04:25 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-zookeeper-user-archive@zookeeper.apache.org Received: (qmail 5994 invoked by uid 500); 9 Sep 2014 08:04:25 -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 5980 invoked by uid 99); 9 Sep 2014 08:04:25 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (140.211.11.136) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 09 Sep 2014 08:04:24 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.5 required=5.0 tests=HTML_MESSAGE,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of boylook@gmail.com designates 209.85.215.47 as permitted sender) Received: from [209.85.215.47] (HELO mail-la0-f47.google.com) (209.85.215.47) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 09 Sep 2014 08:04:19 +0000 Received: by mail-la0-f47.google.com with SMTP id el20so10284988lab.20 for ; Tue, 09 Sep 2014 01:03:58 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; bh=YY/wneoRuXpkiJ0zkaW9PBX8T9c/BYOzt0S7KHkbGdw=; b=Eb+q4YFo+CiN/yDSViD5xlRYGLweIRKkHlEM32NYEpluns24gJaiCmgMzzYzmQrTSF oldICWPrhbQ6YJzoeMxYlZTRDlaB8y2UJj3RIR2uRJ6VYWco701WSXM/yXXsIaGAwAXg wERoh0bg+h9PpxSSZGvNtC+9LulQQ9lMv20RwPirxMEMPvBvQhrinqavnwjRn8HG+iC4 q7Jo/nDubOptTeoa4wWOL+3dDApxYybT5TVrTycoET98DK+fF7QVG7a0+eVMrDvgzYgS jpDV8WHpK3jbNkQ3/RyHTfR3dt16kf2UZyPpnuyKDukMwtK8Hqw4rEM4o5CGaA0RVmYC IwkA== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.152.4.39 with SMTP id h7mr34363451lah.49.1410249838257; Tue, 09 Sep 2014 01:03:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.112.28.74 with HTTP; Tue, 9 Sep 2014 01:03:58 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 9 Sep 2014 16:03:58 +0800 Message-ID: Subject: zookeeper+haproxy question From: =?UTF-8?B?QmksaG9uZ3l14oCUbWlrZQ==?= To: user@zookeeper.apache.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=089e013d1c46a76b1a05029d60e1 X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org --089e013d1c46a76b1a05029d60e1 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Hi all, Is there any problem that zookeeper work with hapxory I found one of our zookeeper cluster is working behind the haproxy on production. and i think it's not necessary to do this cuz zookeeper support ha by naive . so my question is : whether the use pattern has any side effect? any help will appreciate thanks --089e013d1c46a76b1a05029d60e1--