question about monitor and paxos relationship

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Fri, Aug 29, 2014 at 12:52 AM, pragya jain <prag_2648 at yahoo.co.in> wrote:
> #2: why odd no. of monitors are recommended for production cluster, not even
> no.?

Because to achieve a quorum, you must always have participation of
more than 50% of the monitors.  Not 50%.  More than 50%.  With an even
number of monitors, half is not a quorum so you need half + 1.  With
an odd number of monitors, there's no such thing as half.  So with an
even number of monitors, one is always "wasted."

1 monitors -> 1 to make quorum -> 0 can be lost
2 monitors -> 2 to make quorum -> 0 can be lost
3 monitors -> 2 to make quorum -> 1 can be lost
4 monitors -> 3 to make quorum -> 1 can be lost
5 monitors -> 3 to make quorum -> 2 can be lost
6 monitors -> 4 to make quorum -> 2 can be lost
7 monitors -> 4 to make quorum -> 3 can be lost

So an even number N of monitors doesn't give you any better fault
resilience than N-1 monitors.  And the more monitors you have, the
more traffic there is between them.  So when N is even, N monitors
consume more resources and provide no extra benefit compared to N-1
monitors.

Hope that helps!


[Index of Archives]     [Information on CEPH]     [Linux Filesystem Development]     [Ceph Development]     [Ceph Large]     [Ceph Dev]     [Linux USB Development]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]     [xfs]


  Powered by Linux