it will be available in 5.2
On 4 Sep 2008, at 15:54, greenapple wrote:
Is this feature available yet?
Thanks,
Gary Tully wrote:
see the broker waitForSlave option introduced in
https://issues.apache.org/activemq/browse/AMQ-596
this allows a master to know it is a master and to not accept
c
Is this feature available yet?
Thanks,
Gary Tully wrote:
>
> see the broker waitForSlave option introduced in
> https://issues.apache.org/activemq/browse/AMQ-596
> this allows a master to know it is a master and to not accept
> connections until a slave has attached.
>
> it does not fix the p
see the broker waitForSlave option introduced in
https://issues.apache.org/activemq/browse/AMQ-596
this allows a master to know it is a master and to not accept
connections until a slave has attached.
it does not fix the problem of replicating old/existing state but it
does allow the situation to
On Wed, Sep 3, 2008 at 2:55 PM, greenapple <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Thanks for your response Bruce,
>
> My question is regarding messages that were on the master before the slave
> connected. Is there a way to sync those?
>
> Assume the following:
> 1. Master starts up
> 2. Client publish 20
Thanks for your response Bruce,
My question is regarding messages that were on the master before the slave
connected. Is there a way to sync those?
Assume the following:
1. Master starts up
2. Client publish 20 messages
3. Slave starts up
4. Messages from now onwards are replicated
My question:
On Wed, Sep 3, 2008 at 2:41 PM, greenapple <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Simple question:
>
> If a simple master/slave failover is configured with ActiveMQ 5.1. The
> master starts up. A while later the slave starts up and connects. By the
> time the slave connects, the master would have many mess
