Home | About | Sematext search-lucene.com search-hadoop.com
NEW: Monitor These Apps!
elasticsearch, apache solr, apache hbase, hadoop, redis, casssandra, amazon cloudwatch, mysql, memcached, apache kafka, apache zookeeper, apache storm, ubuntu, centOS, red hat, debian, puppet labs, java, senseiDB
 Search Hadoop and all its subprojects:

Switch to Threaded View
Zookeeper >> mail # user >> Running Zookeeper in 2 machines


Copy link to this message
-
Re: Running Zookeeper in 2 machines
yes, and more than that - its theoretically impossible to tolerate
half or more failures in a completely asynchronous environment if you
want to provide strongly consistent replicated storage. Similar to the
CAP theorem - in ZK when there is a partition we choose C over A.
On Tue, Nov 5, 2013 at 2:29 PM, Cameron McKenzie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Yes, I guess in this situation there's no guarantee that A has the latest
> data. I think that this is just an inherent limitation of the quorum based
> writes though. Unless you have three separate machines at geographically
> redundant sites, I don't think that you have true redundancy.
> cheers
> Cam
NEW: Monitor These Apps!
elasticsearch, apache solr, apache hbase, hadoop, redis, casssandra, amazon cloudwatch, mysql, memcached, apache kafka, apache zookeeper, apache storm, ubuntu, centOS, red hat, debian, puppet labs, java, senseiDB