问题
Use case: 100 Servers in a pool; I want to start a ZooKeeper service on each Server and Server applications (ZooKeeper client) will use the ZooKeeper cluster (read/write). Then there is no single point of failure.
Is this solution possible for this use case? What about the performance?
What if there are 1000 Servers in the pool?
回答1:
If you are simply trying to avoid a single point of failure, then you only need 3 servers. In a 3 node ensemble, a single failure can be tolerated with the remaining 2 nodes forming the quorum. The more servers you have the worse write performance will be. And 100 servers is the extreme of this, if ZK can even handle it.
However, having that many clients is no problem at all. Zookeeper has active deployments with many more than 1000 clients. If you find that you need more servers to handle your read load, you can always add Observers. I highly recommend you join the list serve. It is an excellent way to quickly have your questions answered, and likely in much more detail than anyone will give you on SO.
回答2:
Maybe zookeeper is not the right tool?
Hazelcast does what you want, I think. You can hundreds of peers, and if the master is lost a new one is elected from all the peers.
You don't need to use all of hazel cast. You can just use the maps, or just the worker pools, or just the synchronisation primitives, or just the messaging etc.
来源：https://stackoverflow.com/questions/14348409/maximum-servers-in-a-zookeeper-ensemble-cluster