3.0.1.
my watches get recreated on the new server but I'm still too aware of
connections.
In fact, shouldn't disconnect be removed entirely? Or is this just advice
telling the client that something bad might have happened?
Kevin
On Tue, Jan 6, 2009 at 7:12 PM, Mahadev Konar wrote:
> http:
>
> > It's almost certainly what the user wants anyway.
> Its just that the watches are pretty lightweight and sending bytes around
> is
> just more work to do at the server. Though we should experiment with how
> much more load it generates and how useful would it be to send out the
> bytes
> with
On Tue, Jan 6, 2009 at 7:09 PM, Mahadev Konar wrote:
> Does onData mean a datawatch?
>
SorryI should have recorded the actual events.
It's a NodeCreated event being thrown when reconnecting
this is the result of event.toString on the events as I see them.
WatchedEvent: Server state ch
>From what I can tell, a session will only expire if it can't communicate
with the ensemble due to the entire servers failing or the network splitting
preventing a ZK node from seeing the servers.
Correct?
Then in this case, an application should in theory only care about session
expiration and ZK
Can this be thrown when using multiple servers as long as > 1 of them is
online?
Trying to figure out of I should try some type of reconnect if a single
machine fails instead of failing altogether.
Kevin
--
Founder/CEO Spinn3r.com
Location: San Francisco, CA
AIM/YIM: sfburtonator
Skype: burtonat
Creating this node with this ACL:
Created /foo
setAcl /foo world:anyone:w
Causes the exception included below.
It's an infinite loop so it's just called over and over again filling my
console.
I'm just doing an exists( path, true ); ... setting a watch still causes the
problem.
java.lang.Null
Does javadoc help? :)
Mahadev
On 1/6/09 4:10 PM, "Kevin Burton" wrote:
>>
>>
>> zk.getData( event.getPath(), true, this, null );
>>
>>>
>>>
> Also, why not rename this getDataAsync I can't tell the difference just
> by looking at the method and the different number of arguments.
>
> So if I understand this correctly, if I receive a NodeDataChanged event, and
> then attempt do do a read of that node, there's a race condition where the
> server could crash and I would be disconnected and my read would hit an
> Exception
> Or, the ACL could change and I no longer have permiss
http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ZOOKEEPER-23
This has been fixed in zookeeper-3.0 release. Are you using a release from
sourceforge?
mahadev
On 1/6/09 4:57 PM, "Kevin Burton" wrote:
> This could be simplified if the semantics for reconnect were simplified.
> Is there any reason why I sh
Does onData mean a datawatch?
onConnect
> onData path: /foo, version: 4, data: '2333'
> onDisconnect
> onConnect
> onData path: /foo, version: 4, data: '2333'
Are these the sequence of events that you get on the client?
mahadev
On 1/6/09 5:03 PM, "Kevin Burton" wrote:
> I have an event watch
Hi Kevin,
The interrupt exception would be thrown in case any other thread tries to
interrupt zookeeper threads during a client call (its not really
interrupting the server but interrupting the client threads). Its like any
synchronous operation that waits throwing an interrupted exception if
inte
Why does ZK throw InterruptedException?
Shouldn't this be a KeeperException instead of a java system exception when
interrupt() is called?
The javadoc just says:
"If the server transaction is interrupted"
If this is a ZK related it should be KeeperException...
--
Founder/CEO Spinn3r.com
Loca
I have an event watching a file... and if I restart the server I get this:
onConnect
onData path: /foo, version: 4, data: '2333'
onDisconnect
onConnect
onData path: /foo, version: 4, data: '2333'
It re-issues the same version of the file. I can of course watch for this in
my code but it seems lik
This could be simplified if the semantics for reconnect were simplified.
Is there any reason why I should know about a disconnect if ZK is just going
to reconnect me to another server in 1ms?
Why not hide *all* of this form the user and have the client re-issue
watches on reconnect and hold off on
>
> 3) it's possible for your code to get notified of a change, but never
> process the change. This might happen if:
> a) a node changed watch fires
> b) your client code runs an async getData
> c) you are disconnected from the server
>
Also, this seems very confusing...
If I run an async req
So if I understand this correctly, if I receive a NodeDataChanged event, and
then attempt do do a read of that node, there's a race condition where the
server could crash and I would be disconnected and my read would hit an
Exception
Or, the ACL could change and I no longer have permission to read
>
>
> zk.getData( event.getPath(), true, this, null );
>
>>
>>
Also, why not rename this getDataAsync I can't tell the difference just
by looking at the method and the different number of arguments.
Should make things a bit more straight forward.
Kevin
--
Founder/CEO Spinn3r.com
Location:
> 1) you are ignoring the result codes in the callbacks, this could get you
> into trouble (say you do a getData on a node that has been deleted ie
> someone changes then immed. deletes the node)
>
Actually I think I removed that FIXME.
I'll try to fix this now..
Another issue was that the A
I should have been more clear on 3c - in this case you will get notified
in the callback of CONNECTIONLOSS for any pending async requests, but as
you are ignoring rc it may cause problems.
Patrick
Patrick Hunt wrote:
Hi Kevin, a couple of issues I noticed while looking at the pastebin:
1) yo
Hi Kevin, a couple of issues I noticed while looking at the pastebin:
1) you are ignoring the result codes in the callbacks, this could get
you into trouble (say you do a getData on a node that has been deleted
ie someone changes then immed. deletes the node)
2) I'm confused by one of your co
I think ben already responded to your second question. Just to make sure all
of the questions in 2 are answered -- -
> 2. What happens to Empheral Nodes when a zookeeper server (not client) dies or
> is separated from the group ?
>
> Supposing there are 5 zookeeper servers: server_1, ..., server
With respect to your 2nd question (in case it didn't get answered) nothing
happens to the ephemeral nodes. as long as the client is able to talk to any
active server before the session timeout the ephemeral nodes will stay.
ben
From: Nuthan Ashkore [nutha
Your first case only works if it is okay to miss messages as long as you see
the latest.
For your second case (using a directory with a child node for each message) I
agree with flavio that you do not want to use ephemeral nodes. you can
implement a ttl by having a daemon process that periodica
On Jan 6, 2009, at 6:55 PM, Kevin Burton wrote:
In case 1), if you are proposing to overwrite the content of the
znode,
then you would need first to make sure that all receivers have
already
received the previous message. This doesn't seem a good solution to
me
because a client that want
One potential problem with solution 2 is that a naive implementation
may cause what we call a "herd effect": once there is a new message,
zookeeper generates a large number of notifications and all these
clients generate a request to receive the message. Depending on the
requirements of you
>
> In case 1), if you are proposing to overwrite the content of the znode,
> then you would need first to make sure that all receivers have already
> received the previous message. This doesn't seem a good solution to me
> because a client that wants to broadcast a message would have to wait until
If I understand it correctly, you propose two mechanisms:
1- Have one single node, and modify the data of that znode;
2- Have a znode, say "/broadcast", and have clients creating a new
child znode under "/broadcast" for every new message they want to
broadcast.
In case 1), if you are propos
>
> 1. Group Messaging:
> Is it possible to do group messaging with zookeeper 3.0.1 ?
> If not, are there any plans to add group messaging (say w/ casual ordering
> or even better total ordering) to future releases ?
> What would be the best approach if I need to do group messaging using
> zookeepe
Hey guys.
I think I'm finally in the position to push ZK into production for a while
to test it out.
My biggest feedback (other than the small bugs I found) was that the API
could be a bit simpler.
I codified my thoughts here:
http://pastebin.com/f2ecea8c7
http://pastebin.com/f62a01e9
Basicall
I've 2 separate questions regarding zookeeper:
1. Group Messaging:
Is it possible to do group messaging with zookeeper 3.0.1 ?
If not, are there any plans to add group messaging (say w/ casual ordering or
even better total ordering) to future releases ?
What would be the best approach if I need
Crazy, I don't know how I missed that...
Wouldn't it be cleaner to specify this as a List of host:port names?
Kevin
On Mon, Jan 5, 2009 at 10:36 AM, Thomas Vinod Johnson <
thomas.john...@sun.com> wrote:
> Kevin Burton wrote:
>
>> The ZooKeeper constructor only takes a host and port... not a list
31 matches
Mail list logo
