ZooKeeper vs. Doozer vs. Etcd

Re:ZooKeeper vs. Doozer vs. Etcd by maplebed on Wednesday September 11, 2013 @01:03PM (#6368370)

I chose Zookeeper to achieve this same goal a while ago (before I heard of etcd). I have been pleasantly surprised at how useful having a coordination service is in my infrastructure in addition to a configuration management service. Because of this, even though etcd looks like it serves distributed configuration management better (aka simpler), I'm happy with my choice of Zookeeper.

Two examples of how a coordination service has been useful:

* cluster wide throttles to help protect overwhelmable backends

* redundancy in maintenance cronjobs that really only want to be run once per cluster per time period

(edited for formatting)

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:ZooKeeper vs. Doozer vs. Etcd by SEJeff on Wednesday September 11, 2013 @11:33PM (#6371898)

How do you power cron from ZK? Do you use something like airbnb's chronos[1]?

[1] http://nerds.airbnb.com/introducing-chronos

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:ZooKeeper vs. Doozer vs. Etcd by maplebed on Wednesday September 18, 2013 @03:43PM (#6407570)

No, I took a different approach. Any normal cron job that wants to be run only once (per cluster) grabs a zookeeper lock. Those that fail to acquire the lock exit and try again during the next interval. This is implemented with a wrapper around the cron job that takes care of locking: https://github.com/ParsePlatform/Ops/blob/master/tools/get_z.... More details here: http://blog.parse.com/2013/03/11/implementing-failover-for-r...

[ Parent | on HN ]