Ok Robert. For the scale you mentioned, is should be fine in my opinion. Regards, Srinath
On Jul 27, 2017 6:23 AM, "Robert Friberg" <robert.frib...@devrex.se> wrote: > > Thank you Srinath, > > I see now that my question was unclear and actually had an incomplete > sentence... > > My idea is to have 3 VM cluster and each VM will run both zookeeper and > kafka. > > -- > Robert Friberg > Building OrigoDB at Devrex Labs > +46733839080 > > -----Original Message----- > From: Srinath C [mailto:srinat...@gmail.com] > Sent: den 26 juli 2017 20:39 > To: users@kafka.apache.org > Subject: Re: colocating zookeeper on the kafka broker nodes > > Hi Robert, > > By colocating the zookeeper servers on the same VM we could have a > downtime if the VM happened to go down. Having the servers on different VMs > will reduce the risk factor. > > For example, if the zookeeper cluster has 5 servers you can tolerate upto > 2 servers going down and still have no downtime. > > Regards, > Srinath > > > On Jul 27, 2017 5:55 AM, "Robert Friberg" <robert.frib...@devrex.se> > wrote: > > Hi, > > I'm preparing a production grade install of Kafka. The message volume will > be very low, peak load in messages/second would be measured in the 100's. > Message size is on average 0.3kb. The number of topics will be < 100 and > the typical number of consumers per topic 2 or 3. > > Reading the docs and other best practices found it seems like a lot of the > recommendations are focused on performance. I'm guessing that some > practices are more important than others. In particular I'm wondering if it > would be suitable to co-locate the zookeepers on the same VM's as I've > heard from multiple sources that this is not recommended. My guess is that > this is acceptable given the small workload. > > Does anyone here disagree or care to elaborate why this would be bad/good? > > -- > Robert Friberg > Building OrigoDB at Devrex Labs > +46733839080 >
