Thanks Ted.

On Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 5:56 PM, Ted Dunning <[email protected]> wrote:

> At the risk of being rude, a quick search on Google for [zookeeper
> performance] gives the following top hit:
>
>     http://wiki.apache.org/hadoop/ZooKeeper/Performance
>
> The very nice graph that Patrick did many moons ago is missing, but the
> link to
>
>     http://wiki.apache.org/hadoop/ZooKeeper/ServiceLatencyOverview
>
> provides some very nice information.
>
> I hate it when people give snarky answers about doing your homework before
> asking in public, but it would be very easy to respond rudely to your
> request.  The Zookeeper mailing list is full of friendly people so I won't
> say much more than that.
>
> In general, when sending requests to mailing lists, you will receive much
> more helpful answers if you demonstrate that you have done a bit of work
> ahead of time instead of depending on the mailing list as your first
> resource.  This link has some good suggestions:
> http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
>
> Making sure that you do this is very important on mailing lists where there
> is less of a premium placed on politeness than there is on most Apache
> mailing lists.  In some mailing lists, asking a poorly researched question
> will subject you to being roasted alive or ignored completely.  This is a
> sad fact of life and it turns lots of newcomers off, but it absolutely does
> happen.
>
>
> On Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 11:36 PM, vilobh meshram <[email protected]
> > wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I am working on a project where we are making use of Zookeeper.
>>
>> I wanted to know the maximum throughput Zookeeper can provide for
>> read/write
>> workloads.
>>
>> Also if there are any standard benchmarks which can be used to measure
>> such
>> throughput can be useful.
>>
>> Also if you can point me to some paper or documents which mention these
>> details will be useful.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Vilobh
>> Graduate Research Associate
>> Department of Computer Science
>> The Ohio State University Columbus Ohio
>>
>
>

Reply via email to