We just need a unique identifier for every server. If such an
identifier "magically" appears somehow, then I believe our protocols
will be equally happy. Now, a mechanism to assign ids would also have
to take into consideration the group scheme we have for hierarchical
quorums. To assign servers to groups, we currently use the identifiers
we assign manually to servers. If we don't have such identifiers, then
we need a different way of configuring groups.
-Flavio
On Sep 29, 2009, at 7:01 PM, Patrick Hunt wrote:
Jason Venner wrote:
I do find having to have a custom file in each zk root somewhat
awkward, as
I like to rsync my configuration files around. I also would prefer
not to
have to have all of my zk nodes listed in the configuration file by
id.
I think I would prefer it if there was a mechanism for each log
directory to
come up with a cluster unique id, and then the jvm running on that
log dir
would advertise that ID.
You are saying to list the server's ip/port in each of the server
config
files, but not the id's, correct? The server id is actually used as
part
of the quorum (zab) protocol - servers with lower id's don't attempt
to
connect to servers with higher id when forming quorum (to avoid 2
servers negotiating on 2 channels/threads). Perhaps this can be worked
around though. Flavio?
I'll enter a jira for tracking this feature as soon as apache issue
tracking comes back (seems to be down right now).
If there was a control that would allow runtime changing of the
required
quorum, then I could dynamically add and remove nodes.
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ZOOKEEPER-107
Patrick
2009/9/29 Ørjan Horpestad <orj...@gmail.com>
Thanks for all of your answers. I can see more clearly why using
an IP
as id could be a bad idea in a ZK setup.
Patrick:
I will indeed try out your Zkconf tool, thanks.
Regards, Orjan
