t;>> >
>>>>> > I have a gateway node that is connected to the host running the
>>>>> container.
>>>>> > From within the container I can ssh to the gateway host *as both the
>>>>> > gateway host and host running the
~# ifconfig -a
>>>> > eth0: flags=4163 mtu 1500
>>>> > *inet 172.17.0.2 netmask 255.255.0.0 broadcast 172.17.255.255*
>>>> > ether 02:42:ac:11:00:02 txqueuelen 0 (Ethernet)
>>>> > RX packets 173015 bytes 3263068025 (3.2 GB)
>>>> > RX errors 0 dropped 0 overruns 0 frame 0
>>>
s 534805 (534.8 KB)
>>> > RX errors 0 dropped 0 overruns 0 frame 0
>>> > TX packets 8450 bytes 534805 (534.8 KB)
>>> > TX errors 0 dropped 0 overruns 0 carrier 0 collisions 0
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > The interesting thing is tha
Yes or Kafka will need it ...
As soon as your orchestrate different microservices this will happen.
> On 8. Jul 2018, at 11:33, Mich Talebzadeh wrote:
>
> Thanks Jorn.
>
> So I gather as you correctly suggested, microservices do provide value in
> terms of modularisation. However, there will
Thanks Jorn.
So I gather as you correctly suggested, microservices do provide value in
terms of modularisation. However, there will always "inevitably" be
scenarios where the receiving artefact say Flink needs communication
protocol changes?
thanks
Dr Mich Talebzadeh
LinkedIn *
https://www.l
That they are loosely coupled does not mean they are independent. For instance,
you would not be able to replace Kafka with zeromq in your scenario.
Unfortunately also Kafka sometimes needs to introduce breaking changes and the
dependent application needs to upgrade.
You will not be able to avo
Hi,
I have created the Kafka messaging architecture as a microservice that
feeds both Spark streaming and Flink. Spark streaming uses micro-batches
meaning "collect and process data" and flink as an event driven
architecture (a stateful application that reacts to incoming events by
triggering comp
