PS:
Not only do we have both...
but I also am trying to put together a plan to safely upgrade a
single-instance mqueue, to artemis.
That's actually what triggered my initial question here
phil brown wrote
> It would be good to know for both mqueue and artemis
> We have both.
> --
> Sent from:
Obviously I’m talking about ActiveMQ (not Artemis).
Regards
JB
> Le 5 mars 2020 à 22:14, Jean-Baptiste Onofre a écrit :
>
> Hi Phil,
>
> Your clients can use failover:broker1,broker2 that automatically deal with
> multi-brokers connection.
>
> You can setup master/slave (there is an unique m
Hi Phil,
Your clients can use failover:broker1,broker2 that automatically deal with
multi-brokers connection.
You can setup master/slave (there is an unique master at a time (active) and
you can have several slaves (inactive, becoming master if master fails)).
So, basically, here’s the scenari
It would be good to know for both mqueue and artemis
We have both.
--
Sent from: http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/ActiveMQ-User-f2341805.html
Are you asking about ActiveMQ 5.x or ActiveMQ Artemis?
Justin
On Thu, Mar 5, 2020 at 3:02 PM phil brown wrote:
> Hi,
> im new to apache MQ, and trying to figure out best practices for disruptive
> maintenance.
> HAproxy has a "drain" setting for its servers. I'm wondering if mqueue has
> somet
Hi,
im new to apache MQ, and trying to figure out best practices for disruptive
maintenance.
HAproxy has a "drain" setting for its servers. I'm wondering if mqueue has
something similar?
We have an mqueue that gets hit by a lot of different things.
I'm tryhing to figure out the best way to shut it
Hi All,
Recently I have noticed that if I enable Async Send on broker through
single producer, then order of message is not honoured. Can someone please
confirm if my observation is correct?
Regards.
