RE: Master+slave+slave

Edson, > Am I correct on supposing it is possible to have 2 bakckups for one master? You can have as many backup nodes as you want or need. But each master node will accept only one backup node during operation. The second backup node will remain idle until the first backup node is somehow gone.

Re: [EXTERNAL] Re: Master-Slave being DB locked both

@Tim @Jean Problem was in /etc/fstab with some errors (example, fstype 'nfs4' being deprecated) + probably app exiting wrongly. After fixing, and rebooting some nodes, since blocked seeing the same lock, everything working fine. Thanks

Re: Master-Slave being DB locked both

I'm not an NFS expert, but is vers=300 really correct? I don't think there's an NFSv300. Also, note that ActiveMQ offers the best support for shared-filesystem master-slave on NFSv4, whereas NFSv3 has undesirable behavior (described in https://activemq.apache.org/shared-file-system-master-slave) t

Re: Master-Slave being DB locked both

Hi, If it’s on NFS, what’s your rsize/wsize and sync mode enabled ? Regards JB > Le 6 mai 2020 à 16:29, Jose Manuel Vega Monroy > a écrit : > > Hi there, > > With broker 5.15.0-1.el7.centos, looking like master and slave both brokers > keeping DB locked with NFS remote share. > > 2020-05-0

Re: Master/Slave setup over Loadbalancer

You'd just specify the load balancer's hostname within the failover transport's URI. When a connection is broken and a reconnect occurs, the client will simply make a new connection request to the load balancer and it will be the load balancer's responsibility to route the connection to the current

Re: Master/Slave setup over Loadbalancer

Hi, Are you talking about ActiveMQ or Artemis ? About ActiveMQ, you can take a look on one of my blog: http://blog.nanthrax.net/?p=936 I will blog about same behavior but with active/active using network of brokers. Regards JB On 21/11/2019 17:12, black&white wrote: > Our Current setup: https

Re: Master / Slave failover - Client connections don't re-connect - using CORE API

OK - I have it working. There was indeed a problem with the ActiveMQ servers master / slave configs in the broker.xml files for each. The sections , were entirely missing, and the only had the local host defined, and not the other one. Thank you Justin for pointing me in the right direction!

Re: Master / Slave failover - Client connections don't re-connect - using CORE API

Thanks. It's running in a Docker container, so I "docker stop" it. I can see the log output as the slave takes over and starts up, and then I can log into the old slave's ActiveMQ management console. And, I can see that the client detects the down master and attempts reconnects. Having said tha

Re: Master / Slave failover - Client connections don't re-connect - using CORE API

One more thing... Since you're using share-store then you either need to really kill the broker (e.g. kill -9 ) to trigger failover or set true if you're stopping the broker gracefully, e.g.: true Justin On Mon, Jul 8, 2019 at 3:03 PM bob.sandif

Re: Master / Slave failover - Client connections don't re-connect - using CORE API

Sorry about the code not showing up. I edited the post to put it in. Thanks for the reply - a simple usage of your suggestion didn't work - but it did change the behaviour, so I'll pursue the possible values for the query params on the url specification. Bob. -- Sent from: http://activemq.228

Re: Master / Slave failover - Client connections don't re-connect - using CORE API

None of the code or configuration came through on your first email. In the second email it didn't come through either, but some of it is visible on the Nabble web page. That said, I think the problem is the URL you're using (i.e. "(tcp://activemq-1:61616,tcp://activemq-2:61616)"). You aren't speci

Re: Master / Slave failover - Client connections don't re-connect - using CORE API

Sorry - a couple of other things. The exception I get on the client (when I shut down the master ActiveMQ) and try to send a message to ActiveMQ is: I'm using a URL like this: I tried: but got an exception like this: -- Sent from: http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/ActiveMQ-User-f234

Re: Master Slave

Hi Tim, Thanks for your feedback, problem resolved. On Thu, Jun 8, 2017 at 2:04 PM, Tim Bain [via ActiveMQ] < ml+s2283324n4727225...@n4.nabble.com> wrote: > Are the messages you're publishing persistent? If not, they're being > stored > in the broker's memory, and are lost on failover. > > On Jun

Re: Master Slave

Are the messages you're publishing persistent? If not, they're being stored in the broker's memory, and are lost on failover. On Jun 8, 2017 8:45 AM, "bigactivemq" wrote: > I have setup my Master Slave configurations , both running in the same > laptop. I successfully tested the failover but I n

Re: master/slave Zookeeper setup for Kahadb.

http://activemq.apache.org/shared-file-system-master-slave.html has all the details of how to configure a shared file system KahaDB. On Mar 28, 2017 8:03 AM, "Tim Bain" wrote: > There isn't one. KahaDB can't be replicated; when you have master/slave > groups using KahaDB, they use shared storage

Re: master/slave Zookeeper setup for Kahadb.

There isn't one. KahaDB can't be replicated; when you have master/slave groups using KahaDB, they use shared storage where only the master has a lock to access it, and if the master dies then a slave locks the storage and becomes the master. Zookeeper is not involved. Tim On Mar 28, 2017 7:39 AM,

Re: Master/Slave and store and forward topic

Glad to hear it, and I wish I'd caught that sooner. Tim On Dec 7, 2015 9:20 AM, "gbrown" wrote: > Thank you this has resolved my problem. > > Appreciate you looking into this. > > Gary > > > > -- > View this message in context: > http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/Master-Slave-and-store-and-f

Re: Master/Slave and store and forward topic

Thank you this has resolved my problem. Appreciate you looking into this. Gary -- View this message in context: http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/Master-Slave-and-store-and-forward-topic-tp4704070p4704663.html Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

Re: Master/Slave and store and forward topic

Your networkConnectors need to have maxReconnectAttempts=0 if you're using failover. This allows the bridge to be rebuilt (which reinitializes the subscriptions properly) when a reconnect occurs; with a non-zero setting, the failover transport eats the fact of the reconnect and the bridge ends up

Re: Master/Slave and store and forward topic

This is my nc entry, same entry on server1 and server2 I am using kahadb with a shared file system, nfs4. Gary -- View this message in context: http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/Master-Slave-and-store-and-forward-topic-tp4704070p4704240.html Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailing list a

Re: Master/Slave and store and forward topic

Can you clarify the network configuration? It would help to see the network connector settings for every individual broker. Something like the following format would be great: Server1 - static:failover:(...) - static:failover:(...) Server2 - static:failover:(...) - static:failover:(...) ... A

Re: Master/Slave and store and forward topic

Yes the dequeue and enqueue counts on the S1 server change as expected. I have not found any clues in the activemq.log, these are my current settings in the log4j.properties log4j.logger.org.apache.activemq.spring=DEBUG log4j.logger.org.apache.activemq.web.handler=WARN log4j.logger.org.springfram

Re: Master/Slave and store and forward topic

OK, that's good info, and thank you for the version number. Am I right to assume that if there were any errors or other unexpected output in the logs on any of your brokers, you'd have mentioned them by now? What about enqueue and dequeue counts for subscriptions on S1? Do you see all enqueues t

Re: Master/Slave and store and forward topic

Also in this test we are only testing with one subscriber. we would have more once we get it working properly. -- View this message in context: http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/Master-Slave-and-store-and-forward-topic-tp4704070p4704100.html Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailing list archiv

Re: Master/Slave and store and forward topic

Looking in HAWTIO on the C2 server the subscriber is called Durable(client1_subscriber1) the Enqueue counter only increased by 1 after failover which could be consumed. After this no more messages make to this subscriber and the counter does not increase. Hope that is the right counter. As I reali

Re: Master/Slave and store and forward topic

My question about enqueues and dequeues was about those counts on each *subscription*, and it wasn't clear from your answer whether that's what you're describing or whether you're describing counts on the topic. On Nov 19, 2015 7:13 AM, "gbrown" wrote: > Subscription is durable. > > When the subs

Re: Master/Slave and store and forward topic

Subscription is durable. When the subscription is stopped and before we failover the messages make it to C1 and are consumed when the subscription is started. So M1 with sub started is consumed and M2, M3, M+ with sub down and then restarted are consumed before failover. With Failover M4 is rece

Re: Master/Slave and store and forward topic

Your networkConnector URIs look fine. Have you run the exact same test without a failover? How is the behavior different? Are your topic subscriptions durable? So you send messages M1 with the subscriber connected and it's received (which is expected), M2 with the subscriber disconnected but be

Re: Master/Slave and store and forward topic

I am using static:failover:(tcp://client1:61616,tcp://client2:61616)?randomize=false&maxReconnectAttempts=-1 A run through of the test I performed is Started all servers, Server1 S1, Server2 S2, Client1 C1 and Cleint2 C2. S1 and C1 are Master and S2 and C2 are slaves connections checked and S1 is

Re: Master/Slave and store and forward topic

Do you see a subscription from the new master of the second pair on the master of the first pair? Also, how are your networkConnectors configured? Did you remember to use either masterslave: or static:failover: transports? Tim On Nov 18, 2015 1:52 PM, "gbrown" wrote: > Hi > > When I setup 2 se

Re: Master / Slave Issue

Message - From: "Tim Bain" To: "ActiveMQ Users" Sent: Monday, July 13, 2015 4:15:00 PM Subject: Re: Master / Slave Issue If your master/slave setup uses KahaDB and shared storage, there is a known possible failure condition where both brokers can become the master if the

Re: Master / Slave Issue

If your master/slave setup uses KahaDB and shared storage, there is a known possible failure condition where both brokers can become the master if the slave loses its NFS connection and can no longer maintain control of the lock. If you think that might have been your situation (if you discover yo

Re: Master-slave shared FS failover resulting in pending msgs that are not consumed until failed broker becomes master again

Your case reminds me of ticket AMQ-5266. The ticket says the issue is fixed with 5.11.0, so you should be fine, but perhaps it is a similar issue. Stephan On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 5:08 AM, artnaseef wrote: > Duplicate messages are an unfortunate possibility for any JMS solution, > hence > the J

Re: Master-slave shared FS failover resulting in pending msgs that are not consumed until failed broker becomes master again

Duplicate messages are an unfortunate possibility for any JMS solution, hence the JMSRedelivered flag - which comes right out of the JMS specification. At some point in a solution such as this, there must be a choice made between allowing possible duplicates and possible lost messages. JMS chose

Re: Master/Slave with repliacated LevelDB, ZooKeeper, and F5 load-balancer

Huh.. This is complicated. I think you would be better off using failover honestly. I’m not sure how AMQ clients would handle the protocol issues with the F5.. I *believe* the way the failover protocol works is that broker1 detects that it’s failing and shuts off its port. I may be wrong thou

Re: master-slave topology in network of brokers

Look at http://activemq.apache.org/clustering.html and http://activemq.apache.org/masterslave.html for the info you need. In a nutshell, the master/slave(s) configuration is a structure to provide HA in an active/passive fashion. -- Questo messaggio è di carattere riservato ed è indirizzato esclu

Re: master-slave topology in network of brokers

Hi, you might want to try this link: http://activemq.apache.org/masterslave.html In a nutshell I think it is fair to say that a network of brokers covers sharing the load between a number of concurrently active brokers and the “normal” use case is a cluster somewhere and the throughput is shar

Re: Master/Slave failover behaviour

Yes, only one master/slave pair. We see that the consumer reconnects to the new promoted master. The problem is that the consumer sends an ack for messages that it received from the other broker. The new broker says/ Ignoring ack received before dispatch; result of failover with an outstanding

Re: Master/Slave failover behaviour

Yes, failover, should "wait" to reconnect to the promoted master. You have only master/slave (no network of brokers), right ? Regards JB On 11/01/2013 10:48 AM, danaR wrote: Hi, Thank you for the reply. Yes, we are using a URI like this: failover:(tcp://192.168.0.195:61616,tcp://192.168.0.196:

Re: Master/Slave failover behaviour

Hi, Thank you for the reply. Yes, we are using a URI like this: failover:(tcp://192.168.0.195:61616,tcp://192.168.0.196:61616)?initialReconnectDelay=100&trackMessages=true Still, I didn't understand your answer. Should using failover have taken care of our problem (the duplicate messages that we

Re: Master/Slave failover behaviour

Hi, I guess that you use failover: URI on the client connection factory ? Anyway, the client "knows" that the master failed. But the failover:* URI should do the trick. Regards JB On 11/01/2013 09:31 AM, danaR wrote: I have a question about the default behavior of ActiveMQ 5.8.0 in a master

Re: Master/Slave: Message Hoarding

Thanks for taking the time to post your findings! On Thu, Aug 29, 2013 at 6:05 PM, stormtrooper wrote: > Hello, > > Well, we've figured this out so I'll record it here for posterity. > > Our master/slave setup was incorrectly configured. > > Originally our architecture was going to have two cl

Re: Master/Slave: Message Hoarding

Hello, Well, we've figured this out so I'll record it here for posterity. Our master/slave setup was incorrectly configured. Originally our architecture was going to have two clusters that talked to each other. In our phased development approach we scaled back to work with just one initially. H

Re: Master/Slave: Message Hoarding

That's quite odd. Can you reproduce this on KahaDB? ie, kahadb is supported for shared master slave (http://activemq.apache.org/shared-file-system-master-slave.html) and it might be easier to debug (without the dependency on the DB) if you can recreate with KahaDB... What do the broker stats say a

Re: Master/Slave: Message Hoarding

bump. Could someone take a peek at this again and see if they have any ideas? (we tried prefetch size = 0 on the client connection URL, and that didn't change anything) Thanks! Les On Mon, Jul 22, 2013 at 7:10 PM, stormtrooper wrote: > Hello all, > > Using ActiveMQ 5.8.0 we are seeing a mess

Re: Master/Slave works but no data is exchanged between the nodes (MySQL backend)

Make sure that your consumers/producers also properly failover to the correct slaves. On Mon, Jun 17, 2013 at 1:31 PM, Clement Buisson < clement.buis...@lookout.com> wrote: > Arf, my badŠ the current configuration is: > I have 2 brokers. Broker A and Broker B with both one master A1/B1 and its >

Re: Master/Slave works but no data is exchanged between the nodes (MySQL backend)

Arf, my badŠ the current configuration is: I have 2 brokers. Broker A and Broker B with both one master A1/B1 and its slave A2/B2 I am using masterslave:/ instead of failover:/ A1:masterslave:(tcp://B1:62626,tcp://B2:62627) A2:masterslave:(tcp://B1:62626,tcp://B2:62627) B1:masterslave:(tcp://A1:

Re: Master/Slave works but no data is exchanged between the nodes (MySQL backend)

Why is B1 connected to itself, and B2 is also connected to itself? Not sure what exactly the network topology is you're going for. But just sending messages by itself won't cause anything to be forwarded (unless you explicitly specify static destinations). In general, to rely on the dynamic demand

Re: master slave - Unrecognized xbean element mapping: masterConnector in namespace http://activemq.apache.org/schema/core

Pure (shared-nothing) master slave is no longer supported: http://activemq.apache.org/pure-master-slave.html jboss-a-mq is based on version 5.8.0 from Apache. On Mon, May 27, 2013 at 11:19 AM, rgupta12 wrote: > trying to set up a master slave broker, getting this (config for slave > below) > >

Re: Master/slave and topic

No they will not be stored if not using any durable subscribers. Any pending messages would be lost on master-slave failover. On Wednesday, February 20, 2013, pebrian27 wrote: > Lets say that I have a shared storage master/slave that has a topic > producer > and non-durable topic consumers. > > W

Re: master/slave within a network of brokers

see https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AMQ-4164 -- View this message in context: http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/master-slave-within-a-network-of-brokers-tp4410862p4658965.html Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

Re: master/slave, consumer can not failover

That seems like a restricted solution that the Consumer should be a servlet. May I know why? What I have is a standalone Consumer (for testing purposes). Not sure how the Production systems are, but the standalone Consumer dies as soon as the Master is down. I have been looking for a solution to t

Re: master/slave, consumer can not failover

Consumer can do failover in web project. Consumer should be a servlet! You can have a try! On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 2:38 AM, joesan [via ActiveMQ] < ml-node+s2283324n4655327...@n4.nabble.com> wrote: > Did you find a solution to this? I have more or less the same issue. My > Producer can fail-over

Re: master/slave, consumer can not failover

Did you find a solution to this? I have more or less the same issue. My Producer can fail-over but my Consumer dies as soon as the master dies. -- View this message in context: http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/master-slave-consumer-can-not-failover-tp4653639p4655327.html Sent from the Acti

Re: master/slave, consumer can not failover

broker uri: failover:(tcp://localhost:61616, tcp://localhost:61617) but the problem still occurs... my configuration is right, the exception indicates that the client fail from 61616, try to reconnect 61617 -- View this message in context: http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/master-slave-cons

Re: master/slave, consumer can not failover

Your failover url should read: String brokerUrl = "failover:(tcp://hostA:61616,tcp://hostB:61617)"; Please try that. Torsten Mielke tors...@fusesource.com tmie...@blogspot.com On Jun 29, 2012, at 1:24 PM, mickhayes wrote: > This bit: > > /String brokerUrl = "failover:(tcp://hostA, tcp://ho

Re: master/slave, consumer can not failover

This bit: /String brokerUrl = "failover:(tcp://hostA, tcp://hostB)"; needs to include the port number 61617. Does it? - Michael Hayes B.Sc. (NUI), M.Sc. (DCU), SCSA SCNA -- View this message in context: http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/master-slave-consumer-can-not-failover-tp46536

Re: master/slave, consumer can not failover

Thanks for you answer! *In my environment, hostA on port 61616, hostB on 61617.* When master down, slave becomes master. Producer can failover, but consumer not with the same configuration. String brokerUrl = "failover:(tcp://localhost:61616,tcp://localhost:61617)"; What troubles me is why the

Re: master/slave, consumer can not failover

What's the consumer's logging output? When you shut down the master on hostA, the consumer will loose its connection to the broker and should try to reconnect. It will try both of the tcp urls in your list until it reconnects. Also, can you confirm that your slave broker starts up just fine on

Re: Master/Slave issue with Network of Brokers

So nobody else is having a similar issue that could have some knowledge to share? The topology I am trying is: embedded broker -> share nothing master slave -> consumer I also tried: embedded broker -> share nothing master slave -> embedded broker -> consumer and embedded broker -> shared FS

Re: Master/Slave issue with Network of Brokers

I'm having a very similar issue. I'm using 5.5 on Linux Ubuntu with Java 6. I have an embedded broker inside Tomcat forwarding messages to a master slave share nothing setup. Consumers are in a different machine running Tomcat connected directly to the master. Everything seems to work just fine whi

Re: master/slave within a network of brokers

john, I have been using connections like between two sets of master/slave brokers that are networked together. This generally works but I am working on tracking down some occasional failures of my tests that seem related to the network never getting set up (not sure about that though -- it is a

RE: Master/slave configuration not working

Hi Matt, Can you help with this, I can provide config file and other details you need. Thanks, Chaitanya -Original Message- From: Chaitanya Gupta [mailto:chaitanya_gu...@persistent.co.in] Sent: Wednesday, February 15, 2012 5:56 PM To: users@activemq.apache.org Subject: Master/slave confi

RE: Master/slave configuration not working

PM To: users@activemq.apache.org Subject: RE: Master/slave configuration not working Well, this could be due to the locking mechanism which is implemented in Active MQ. In MySQL I had simiilar problems, which could be solved switching the MySQL engine to Inno DB. -- View this message in context:

RE: Master/slave configuration not working

Well, this could be due to the locking mechanism which is implemented in Active MQ. In MySQL I had simiilar problems, which could be solved switching the MySQL engine to Inno DB. -- View this message in context: http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/Master-slave-configuration-not-working-tp43

RE: Master/slave configuration not working

rom: Zagan [mailto:erbsen.fr...@gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, February 15, 2012 7:52 PM To: users@activemq.apache.org Subject: RE: Master/slave configuration not working Which database do you use? -- View this message in context: http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/Master-slave-configuration-n

RE: Master/slave configuration not working

Which database do you use? -- View this message in context: http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/Master-slave-configuration-not-working-tp4390225p4390590.html Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

RE: Master/slave configuration not working

: Re: Master/slave configuration not working Hi Chaitanya, are you using Shared Database Master/Slave or Shared Filesystem Master/Slave? -- View this message in context: http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/Master-slave-configuration-not-working-tp4390225p4390422.html Sent from the ActiveMQ

Re: Master/slave configuration not working

Hi Chaitanya, are you using Shared Database Master/Slave or Shared Filesystem Master/Slave? -- View this message in context: http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/Master-slave-configuration-not-working-tp4390225p4390422.html Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

Re: Master/Slave failover: Consumer get less messages it should.

Hi, I’ve the following situation when failover is produced artificially by killing the master (I´m talking about a master/slave configuration): Inmediatly after the consumer connects the slave, it begins to receive any messages that previously where delivered by the master due to the fact that the

Re: Master/Slave failover: Consumer get less messages it should.

Hi, this reply is just to ensure the original question is dispatched to the mailing list. Regards, Guillermo. -- View this message in context: http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/Master-Slave-failover-Consumer-get-less-messages-it-should-tp4366155p4372871.html Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mai

Re: Master/Slave configuring clients

Unfortunately I see the same behavior in linux as well. Any thoughts? Vijay wrote: > > Yes. I am using WinXP. Will try to run in linux and verify. Post the > results back here. Thanks. > > > boday wrote: >> >> are you using Windows? If so, you might see this bug >> https://issues.apache.org

Re: Master/Slave configuring clients

Yes. I am using WinXP. Will try to run in linux and verify. Post the results back here. Thanks. boday wrote: > > are you using Windows? If so, you might see this bug > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AMQ-3273 AMQ-3273 ...it caused me a > lot of confusion while trying to test this scenari

Re: Master/Slave configuring clients

are you using Windows? If so, you might see this bug https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AMQ-3273 AMQ-3273 ...it caused me a lot of confusion while trying to test this scenario. Vijay wrote: > > I am rephrasing my question for get rid of confusion. > > We have a Converter app (Standalone JM

Re: Master/Slave configuring clients

I am rephrasing my question for get rid of confusion. We have a Converter app (Standalone JMS consumer client based on Spring DefaultMessageListenerContainer) which will consume messages from AMQ Broker hosted on same server. An upstream system will publish messages on to "TEST.FOO" Q on this bro

Re: Master/Slave configuring clients

Can anyone reply pls? This is an urgent issue for us. Thanks. -- View this message in context: http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/Master-Slave-configuring-clients-tp3630225p3638168.html Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

Re: Master/Slave configuring clients

Typo. I am using this : For client 1: tcp://masterhost:port For client 2: tcp://slavehost:port -- View this message in context: http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/Master-Slave-configuring-clients-tp3630225p3635592.html Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

Re: Master/Slave configuring clients

Slave broker is not usable until Master goes down. Currently I am configuring clients like this: For client 1: tcp://masterhost:port For client 2: vm://slavehost:port This seem to be causing message loss. Any thoughts. -- View this message in context: http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/M

Re: Master/Slave configuring clients

see http://activemq.apache.org/shared-file-system-master-slave.html In short, consumers should use the following URLs. If the consumers are embedded in the brokers, then using VM for the transport appears to work fine. However, if the broker goes down, so does the consumer (generally)... Consum

Re: Master/slave configuration

When you create a connection using the ActiveMQConnectionFactory, cast it to an ActiveMQConnection: ActiveMQConnectionFactory factory = new ActiveMQConnectionFactory(brokerUrl); ActiveMQConnection conn = (ActiveMQConnection) factory.createConnection(); And let your TransportListener implement

Re: Master/slave configuration

Thanks for the replies. The reason we have redundant clients is to survive hardware crash as both broker and client reside on the same machine. We keep the Client 2 live to just keep trying for connection to slave until master goes down. Once slave becomes master, it gets connection and starts pr

Re: Master/slave configuration

Instead of having a client "connected" to the slave (the slave will not accept connections until the master dies, if I remember correctly), you should use only one client (JMS client 1) and use the failover transport. The client will then automatically start using the slave when the master dies. h

Re: Master/slave configuration

failover. Dead is dead. On Jun 24, 2011, at 12:07 AM, Vijay wrote: > server1 > > Master > JMS client 1 connects to Master > > Server2 > > Slave > JMS client 2 connects to slave > > > I need clarification on following scenarios. > > 1.If master dies, slave is still keeping J

Re: Master/slave + cluster leaves messages on slave

OK. My first Jira post, hope I didn't mess it up: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AMQ-3376 -- View this message in context: http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/Master-slave-cluster-leaves-messages-on-slave-tp3617053p3619565.html Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailing list archive at Nabble

Re: Master/slave + cluster leaves messages on slave

Sounds like bug. Can you create a test case and raise a Jira? Regards -- Dejan Bosanac - http://twitter.com/dejanb - The experts in open source integration and messaging - http://fusesource.com ActiveMQ in Action - http://www.manning.com/snyder/ Blog - http://www.nighttale.net O

Re: Master-Slave Failure with ActiveMQ 5.4.1 & JBoss 5.1

I get hundreds of these exceptions on the master and slave and I'm not even sending any messages. They tend to come in groups where each exception is separated by about 20-60 secs and the groups start and end at random times (ie no client activity) and last for an hour or two. I also get these ex

Re: Master/Slave Failover with JDBC blocks Tomcat startup

Albrecht, to infinitely try to obtain the lock on the shared persistence layer is exactly a slave's job. It does nothing else before that happens. The process that has the lock automatically is the master, the process that waits for the lock automatically is the slave. This applies to all addit

Re: Master-Slave Failure with ActiveMQ 5.4.1 & JBoss 5.1

Has anyone faced this problem with 5.4.1? I' am still stuck on this... Any pointer would be of great help.. -- View this message in context: http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/Master-Slave-Failure-with-ActiveMQ-5-4-1-JBoss-5-1-tp3003817p3009741.html Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailing list

Re: master/slave status command

On 27/07/2010 18:30, cobrien wrote: > > if slave=false always it sounds like a bug to me. a similar bug was > reported, AMQ-2669, that looks like this one and is reported fixed in 5.4.0. > > https://issues.apache.org/activemq/browse/AMQ-2669 Yup, I upgraded to 5.4.0 and this is working fine no

Re: master/slave status command

if slave=false always it sounds like a bug to me. a similar bug was reported, AMQ-2669, that looks like this one and is reported fixed in 5.4.0. https://issues.apache.org/activemq/browse/AMQ-2669 -clark www.ttmsolutions.com ActiveMQ reference guide at http://bit.ly/AMQRefGuide Andrew Wasil

Re: master/slave status command

Hi Clark, > Could you satisfy your requirements using advisory messages to listen for > the ActiveMQ.Advisory.MasterBroker notification to keep track of who is the > master broker? > > http://activemq.apache.org/advisory-message.html Thanks for your answer. Yeah, I guess this could work for

Re: master/slave status command

Andrew, Could you satisfy your requirements using advisory messages to listen for the ActiveMQ.Advisory.MasterBroker notification to keep track of who is the master broker? http://activemq.apache.org/advisory-message.html Clark www.ttmsolutions.com ActiveMQ reference guide at http://bit.ly/A

Re: Master/Slave and non-persistence message

In pure master/slave topology all state is replicated to the slave broker, including messages. More here: http://activemq.apache.org/pure-master-slave.html On Fri, 23 Jul 2010 14:26:57 -0700 (PDT) jzhang wrote: > > Can Master/Slave be used for non-persistence message? It has > persistent data

Re: Master/Slave mode - slave never taking over

Hi Rich, have you replicated the network connections in the master configuration into the slave configuration ? This is important. How did you stop the master ? - did you just kill it ? (this shouldn't be problem - but might help to identify where it is) You could try failover://tcp://67.23.5.

Re: Master/Slave issue with Network of Brokers

Hello Mike, I think I found a way to make it work: -no network connector on Master -on the networked broker a static duplex connector to the Master -on the Slave a static duplex connector to the networked connector This way, when the Master is down, the Slave will start its own duplex connector wi

Re: Master/Slave issue with Network of Brokers

Hello Garry, The problem is not with the clients using the failover transport, but on the remote broker that is using static network connector. For brokers discovery I cannot use failover but static and this network connector is not behaving the same way as the failover transport which "connect to

Re: Master/Slave issue with Network of Brokers

Some steps to help diagnose: 1) enable debug logging for both the client and broker. org.apache.activemq=DEBUG in the log4j.properties You should see the client failover transport detect the connection failure and start retrying 2) A thread dump of the client should also show threads waiting f

Re: Master/Slave issue with Network of Brokers

Hello Mike, I have the same problem. I tested and re-tested and it is not working. Have you found any solution? I'm currently running it in a Windows environment.  The client seems to be fine, it is the broker that's the issue. Mike -- View this message in context: http://old.nabble.com/Maste

Re: Master/Slave issue with Network of Brokers

I'm currently running it in a Windows environment.  The client seems to be fine, it is the broker that's the issue. Mike From: Josh Carlson To: "users@activemq.apache.org" ; MikeCola Sent: Mon, March 1, 2010 11:22:47 AM Subject: Re: Mas

Re: Master/Slave issue with Network of Brokers

Is your client hung? Is your client running under Linux? I have a problem where if the actual host machine serving as the master goes down (as opposed to just the process) the client processes hang trying to read/write from the socket connection. I've yet to investigate the issue but was just c

  1   2   >