> it does seem like a good idea to make multiple zk handles share a
> connection, but as ted points out, they may have different timeouts, which
> would make the sharing logic quite complicated. i think the implementation
> might also be quite complicated. having said that, if someone could come up
> with a simple and correct connection sharing implementation, we (or at
> least i) would be open to it.
I agree with Benjamin, that it is unlikely that multiple ZooKeeper connections
in one application will ever become a bottleneck.
However I have some patches in the ZK jira (most notable ZOOKEEPER-911) and in
my mind that have the side effect that one ClientCnxn could easily be shared
for multiple application parts, even with differing changeroots.
Thomas Koch, http://www.koch.ro