Patrick - Thank you, I'll proceed accordingly. -Todd
-Original Message-
From: Patrick Hunt [mailto:ph...@apache.org]
Sent: Wednesday, July 29, 2009 10:30 PM
To: zookeeper-user@hadoop.apache.org
Subject: Re: Zookeeper WAN Configuration
> [Todd] What is the recommended policy r
[Todd] What is the recommended policy regarding patching zookeeper
locally? As an external user, should I patch and compile in the trunk or
in the branch (branch-3.2)?
I've looked at :
http://wiki.apache.org/hadoop/ZooKeeper/HowToContribute
http://wiki.apache.org/hadoop/HowToRelease
And both o
gt; election. I'll open a jira and put up a patch soon.
[Todd] What source file(s) this would be in? I'll take a look at it.
-Todd
-Original Message-
From: Patrick Hunt [mailto:ph...@apache.org]
Sent: Tuesday, July 28, 2009 9:50 AM
To: zookeeper-user@hadoop.apache.org
Subject:
Flavio, please enter a doc jira for this if there are no docs, it should
be in forrest, not twiki btw. It would be good if you could review the
current quorum docs (any type) and create a jira/patch that addresses
any/all shortfall.
Patrick
Flavio Junqueira wrote:
Todd, Some more answers. Ple
Todd, Some more answers. Please check out carefully the information at
the bottom of this message.
On Jul 27, 2009, at 4:02 PM, Todd Greenwood wrote:
I'm assuming that you're setting the weight of ZooKeeper servers in
PODs to zero, which means that their votes when ordering updates do
not co
See here:
http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ZOOKEEPER-29 (in trunk since April,
released in 3.2.0)
http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ZOOKEEPER-368 (not in yet)
On Mon, Jul 27, 2009 at 4:02 PM, Todd Greenwood
wrote:
> [Todd] Great, we'll proceed with hierarchical configuration w/ ZK Servers
Flavio, more questions inline:
-Original Message-
From: Flavio Junqueira [mailto:f...@yahoo-inc.com]
Sent: Sunday, July 26, 2009 12:49 PM
To: zookeeper-user@hadoop.apache.org
Subject: Re: Zookeeper WAN Configuration
Todd, Answers inline:
On Jul 26, 2009, at 11:05 AM, Todd Greenwood
Todd, Answers inline:
On Jul 26, 2009, at 11:05 AM, Todd Greenwood wrote:
Flavio, thank you for the suggestion.
I have looked at the documention (relevant snippets pasted in
below), and looked at the presentations (http://wiki.apache.org/hadoop/ZooKeeper/ZooKeeperPresentations
),
but I sti
This is the problem.
ALL writes go from the leader to all nodes and the transaction isn't done
until a quorum of machines have confirmed the write. Unless you have a
quorum in the central facility, then all writes be as slow as several
round-trips to the peripheral installations. This slows down
ZooKeeper, we provide a user with the ability of configuring servers to
use majority quorums, weights, or a hierarchy of groups.
"""
-Original Message-
From: Flavio Junqueira [mailto:f...@yahoo-inc.com]
Sent: Saturday, July 25, 2009 7:55 AM
To: zookeeper-user@hadoop.apache
hat Flavio mentions below.
-Original Message-
From: Flavio Junqueira [mailto:f...@yahoo-inc.com]
Sent: Friday, July 24, 2009 4:50 PM
To: zookeeper-user@hadoop.apache.org
Subject: Re: Zookeeper WAN Configuration
Just a few quick observations:
On Jul 24, 2009, at 4:40 PM, Ted Dunning wrote
p.apache.org
Subject: Re: Zookeeper WAN Configuration
Just a few quick observations:
On Jul 24, 2009, at 4:40 PM, Ted Dunning wrote:
On Fri, Jul 24, 2009 at 4:23 PM, Todd Greenwood
wrote:
Could you explain the idea behind the Observers feature, what this
concept is supposed to address, and h
s with transaction id
-> Leader responds to ensemble with update + transaction id
-Todd
-Original Message-
From: Flavio Junqueira [mailto:f...@yahoo-inc.com]
Sent: Friday, July 24, 2009 4:50 PM
To: zookeeper-user@hadoop.apache.org
Subject: Re: Zookeeper WAN Configuration
Just a few quick
Just a few quick observations:
On Jul 24, 2009, at 4:40 PM, Ted Dunning wrote:
On Fri, Jul 24, 2009 at 4:23 PM, Todd Greenwood
wrote:
Could you explain the idea behind the Observers feature, what this
concept is supposed to address, and how it applies to the WAN
configuration problem in parti
Servers in a quorum need to be able to talk to each other to elect a
leader. Once a leader is elected, followers only talk to the leader.
Of course, if the leader fails, servers in some quorum will need to
talk to each other again. If no quorum can be formed, the system is
stalled.
-Flavi
On Fri, Jul 24, 2009 at 4:23 PM, Todd Greenwood
wrote:
> Could you explain the idea behind the Observers feature, what this
> concept is supposed to address, and how it applies to the WAN
> configuration problem in particular?
>
Not really. I am just echoing comments on observers from them that
Each member needs a connection to a quorum. The quorum is ceiling((N+1) /
2) members of the cluster.
This guarantees that network partition does not allow two leaders to go on
stamping out revisions independent of each other.
On Fri, Jul 24, 2009 at 4:23 PM, Todd Greenwood
wrote:
> Ted, could y
Sent: Friday, July 24, 2009 3:41 PM
To: zookeeper-user@hadoop.apache.org
Subject: Re: Zookeeper WAN Configuration
Vanilla ZK servers will see security constraints as a network partition.
Any servers that see a minority of the other servers will go tharn until
the
"partition" is healed. That i
Vanilla ZK servers will see security constraints as a network partition.
Any servers that see a minority of the other servers will go tharn until the
"partition" is healed. That isn't what you want (at all).
The ideas for federating ZK or allowing observers would likely do what you
want. I can i
Like most folks, our WAN is composed of various zones, some central
processing, some edge, some corp, and some in between (DMZs). In this
model, a given Zookeeper server will not have direct connectivity to all
of it's peers in the ensemble due to various security constraints. Is
this a problem? Ar
20 matches
Mail list logo
