4 ms·
Love the nice informative website. However: [1] https://www.consul.io/intro/vs/zookeeper.html https://www.consul.io/intro/vs/zookeeper.html This did not uneq
by raspasov 12y ago
Love the nice informative website.
However:
[1] https://www.consul.io/intro/vs/zookeeper.html https://www.consul.io/intro/vs/zookeeper.html
This did not unequivocally convince me in the benefits over ZooKeeper. On the contrary, it makes it seems that ZooKeeper tries to do less, and I strongly prefer simpler tools.
[2] http://aphyr.com/posts/316-call-me-maybe-etcd-and-consul http://aphyr.com/posts/316-call-me-maybe-etcd-and-consul
Have the issues discussed in this article been fully addressed yet?
Overall, can you outline a use case where Consul is definitely better than ZooKeeper?
- armon 12y agoThe issues discussed by aphyr have been fully fixed as of Consul 0.2, several months ago. In the initial release of Consul, only the "default" mode was available and has the now-documented caveat of a stale read possibility. The various consistency modes are now discussed here: https://www.consul.io/docs/internals/consensus.html#default https://www.consul.io/docs/internals/consensus.html#default With respect to ZooKeeper, there are different approaches. ZK provides a low-level primitive on which you can build. Consul provides similar primitives, but it ships with many features out of the box that don't require any development effort. It's a "batteries included" approach. Specific examples: - Real-time configuration with Consul + consul-template - DNS based service discovery - Scalable Nagios replacement - Dynamic HAProxy / Varnish configuration - Application configuration with Consul + envconsul - Triggering config management tools with the event system That is just a handful of uses for Consul that don't require writing any code. Doing similar things with ZK is possible, just requires a lot more work.
- raspasov 12y agoThank you for detailed answer!