That's correct. The option is primarily for testing purposes. Sent from my iPhone
On Nov 5, 2011, at 2:03 PM, Mark <static.void....@gmail.com> wrote: > Ok, so no matter what ZooKeeper is still required when using Kafka. One just > has the option to either loadbalance producer => broker connections via > ZooKeeper or a Loadbalancer. > > Is that correct? If so, I think I finally got it :) > > On 11/5/11 1:29 PM, Jay Kreps wrote: >> It is also worth mentioning that this is just for producers, consumers >> always use zookeeper for load balancing and co-ordination. Logically this >> makes sense--partitioning production is trivial if you don't care about >> semantics of key=>partition assignment, but partitioning consumption is >> more complex because you need to divide up the partitions amongst the set >> of all consumers exactly. >> >> -jay >> >> On Sat, Nov 5, 2011 at 1:19 PM, Jay Kreps<jay.kr...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> The motivation here is is that literally every production process at >>> LinkedIn sends messages to Kafka as part of either user tracking or >>> operational monitoring or both. We are wary of adding that many zk >>> connections and watches, so we run this first tier through a simple L2 load >>> balancer that just randomly balances connections over brokers. The good >>> part about this is that we can do zookeeper upgrades without redeploying >>> all the production apps to upgrade their zk jar. >>> >>> As Neha says, the zk producer is used for key-based partitioning by the >>> smaller number of producers who need that. >>> >>> -Jay >>> >>> >>> On Sat, Nov 5, 2011 at 11:56 AM, Neha >>> Narkhede<neha.narkh...@gmail.com>wrote: >>> >>>> Mark, >>>> >>>> Most publishers at LinkedIn use a hardware load balancer approach. >>>> These are configured to do a TCP healthcheck that monitors if the >>>> kafka port on a broker is working. If it is, then requests are >>>> forwarded to the broker. Some publishers though are using the software >>>> load balancer based on zookeeper. Those applications want to do some >>>> key based partitioning of data. >>>> >>>> Thanks, >>>> Neha >>>> >>>> On Sat, Nov 5, 2011 at 11:49 AM, Mark<static.void....@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> Sorry but I'm a bit confused now. So at LinkedIn you use a loadbalancer >>>>> instead of ZooKeeper or do you use it in conjunction with ZooKeeper? >>>>> >>>>> Thanks >>>>> >>>>> On 11/4/11 7:09 PM, Jun Rao wrote: >>>>>> broker.list is used in the producer property file. One caveat is that >>>> the >>>>>> broker.list approach doesn't do healthcheck. Which means that if a >>>> broker >>>>>> goes down, the client could still try to send messages to it. At >>>> LinkedIn, >>>>>> we rely on a load balancer to do healthcheck for us. The zk-based >>>>>> producer, >>>>>> on the other hand, does health check. >>>>>> >>>>>> You can find out more details about our ZK design in our design page in >>>>>> the >>>>>> website or the paper in >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/Kafka+papers+and+presentations >>>> . >>>>>> Jun >>>>>> >>>>>> On Fri, Nov 4, 2011 at 6:52 PM, Mark<static.void....@gmail.com> >>>> wrote: >>>>>>> I just noticed that there is an option to not use Zookeeper and >>>> instead >>>>>>> one can use a static list of brokers (#9 on >>>>>>> http://incubator.apache.org/** >>>>>>> >>>>>>> kafka/quickstart.html< >>>> http://incubator.apache.org/kafka/quickstart.html>). >>>>>>> Do i put this list in server.properties? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> It doesn't seem like you save much either way as you have to either >>>>>>> a) list out all the nodes in the zookeeper quorum in >>>>>>> zookeeper.properties >>>>>>> b) list out static brokers in server.properties. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> What are the benefits of using ZooKeeper over a static list? Can >>>> someone >>>>>>> also explain how Kafka uses ZooKeeper? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Thanks >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>
