Support Questions
Find answers, ask questions, and share your expertise

Does HDF 2.0 requires its own ZK quorum?

Super Guru

I have HDP 2.3.x cluster running and interested in install HDF 2.0. I want to setup NiFi with HA which requires ZK. Does HDF 2.0 requires its own ZK quorum or can I use my existing ZK quorum on HDP with HDF?

1 ACCEPTED SOLUTION

Accepted Solutions

Master Guru

@Sunile Manjee

There is no reason you can't use another ZK (Including the one provided in HDP). While there is currently no support for installing NiFi within an HDP Ambari stack, you can point your NiFi installation via its config at the ZK quorum in your HDP stack.

If you install NiFi via the HDF Ambari stack, it does have a dependency that forces the installation of ZK in the HDF stack and configures your NiFi service to use it. You can however alter the NiFi configs to use your other ZK.

If you install HDF NiFi via command line and not with Ambari, you can configure it to use your HDP ZK quorum out the gate.

Thanks,

Matt

View solution in original post

4 REPLIES 4

Master Guru

@Sunile Manjee

There is no reason you can't use another ZK (Including the one provided in HDP). While there is currently no support for installing NiFi within an HDP Ambari stack, you can point your NiFi installation via its config at the ZK quorum in your HDP stack.

If you install NiFi via the HDF Ambari stack, it does have a dependency that forces the installation of ZK in the HDF stack and configures your NiFi service to use it. You can however alter the NiFi configs to use your other ZK.

If you install HDF NiFi via command line and not with Ambari, you can configure it to use your HDP ZK quorum out the gate.

Thanks,

Matt

View solution in original post

@mclark Does HDF-2.0 with Ambari Supports Embedded ZooKeeper Server avoiding need of installing a separate quorum?

Master Guru
@Jobin George

no, Ambari based HDF deployments force an external ZK. That ZK is used by the other component services available in the HDF stack as well.

Thanks for the clarification @mclark