Probably it would be a bit of a larger task than you would like, but building a proxy might let you do what you want. Then you could simply filter out the notifications you don't want people to see.
On Fri, Sep 2, 2011 at 11:22 AM, Ben Hall <[email protected]> wrote: > Yeah - I guess to explain a little more... we have a very large number of > clients out in the wild that in essence going to each pool of clients would > be a huge hassle and pain. So - yes we could update our client and provide > a watcher switch but it would be very cumbersome to get to and update each > of the clients. We could also change the ZK structure - but again we would > have to change all of the clients in the wild - a step we are trying to > avoid. > > In short we were looking for just a quick workaround or hack from the > server ensemble perspective even though it may not be a supported or > recommended function - this would be just a one time thing for us. > > Thanks > Ben > > > On Sep 2, 2011, at 12:22 AM, Ted Dunning wrote: > > > I would recommend not spending a whole lot of time figuring out how to > make > > Zookeeper lie to the clients. It is hard enough to make distributed > > software that tells the truth. > > > > Why don't you just make the ZK structure match what you are trying to do? > > For instance, have a znode containing the key and a separate znode that > is > > just for watching. Then the server has the option of updating both > znodes > > or just the key depending on what behavior you want to get. > > > > This is simple and straightforward and makes it very clear what you mean > to > > do. Why hack the server for such a thing? > > > > On Fri, Sep 2, 2011 at 1:37 AM, Mahadev Konar <[email protected] > >wrote: > > > >> Ben, > >> I dont think I fully understand the use case. Is it possible that you > >> can register a different callback for that key? > >> > >> Something like: > >> > >> zk.exists(String path, Watcher watcher) > >> > >> where you can register a different watcher for this path? > >> > >> Would this work? > >> > >> mahadev > >> > >> > >> On Thu, Sep 1, 2011 at 5:58 PM, Ben Hall <[email protected]> wrote: > >>> Hi, > >>> > >>> We have an interesting problem use case that we wanted to ping the > group > >> about. > >>> > >>> We have a Key on all of our Ensemble servers. All of our clients are > >> also subscribed to this key. We want to remove the key from the > ensemble > >> servers without this action getting propagated down to the clients. Or > if > >> it does get propagated down - at a minimum we do not want to watch > callback > >> function to be called. > >>> > >>> Is there a way to in essence sever the watches from the server > >> perspective without the client knowing? > >>> > >>> We are investing looking into the hidden keys on the zookeeper servers > >> that hold the list of watches and possibly editing that key. has anyone > >> done that before? Do we know what happens when that key is edited > manually? > >>> > >>> Any other suggestions or possibilities available to us? > >>> > >>> Thanks > >>> Ben > >> > >
