Hello! As I told I wouldn't use the Zookeeper that is embedded into Solr, but rather setup a standalone one.
-- Regards, Rafał Kuć Sematext :: http://sematext.com/ :: Solr - Lucene - Nutch - ElasticSearch > First of all: thank you for your answers. Yes, I meant side by side > configuration. I think the worst case for ZKs here is to loose two of them. > However, I'm going to use 4 availability zones in same region so at least > this will reduce the risk of loosing both of them at the same time. > Regards. > On 21 November 2012 17:06, Rafał Kuć <r....@solr.pl> wrote: >> Hello! >> >> Zookeeper by itself is not demanding, but if something happens to your >> nodes that have Solr on it, you'll loose ZooKeeper too if you have >> them installed side by side. However if you will have 4 Solr nodes and >> 3 ZK instances you can get them running side by side. >> >> -- >> Regards, >> Rafał Kuć >> Sematext :: http://sematext.com/ :: Solr - Lucene - Nutch - ElasticSearch >> >> > Separate is generally nice because then you can restart Solr nodes >> > without consideration for ZooKeeper. >> >> > Performance-wise, I doubt it's a big deal either way. >> >> > - Mark >> >> > On Nov 21, 2012, at 8:54 AM, Marcin Rzewucki <mrzewu...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >> >> Hi, >> >> >> >> I have 4 solr collections, 2-3mn documents per collection, up to 100K >> >> updates per collection daily (roughly). I'm going to create SolrCloud4x >> on >> >> Amazon's m1.large instances (7GB mem,2x2.4GHz cpu each). The question is >> >> what about zookeeper? It's going to be external ensemble, but is it >> better >> >> to use same nodes as solr or dedicated micro instances? Zookeeper does >> not >> >> seem to be resources demanding process, but what would be better in this >> >> case ? To keep it inside of solrcloud or separately (micro instances >> seem >> >> to be enough here) ? >> >> >> >> Thanks in advance. >> >> Regards. >> >>
