On Tue, Jul 21, 2009 at 10:14 AM, Rob Davies wrote:
> Don't use journaledJDBC - just JDBC - or KahaDB - or the default
> (AMQPersistenceAdaptor)
OK we're running an antiquated version of ActiveMQ (4.1.1), so it
looks like we don't have the fancy AMQ or KahaDB persistence adapters.
With this confi
Don't use journaledJDBC - just JDBC - or KahaDB - or the default
(AMQPersistenceAdaptor)
On 21 Jul 2009, at 17:57, Eric Gearhart wrote:
On Mon, Jul 20, 2009 at 11:46 AM, Rob Davies
wrote:
Hi Eric,
I'm not aware of anyone who has done this - but if flock() is
supported it
should work - if
On Mon, Jul 20, 2009 at 11:46 AM, Rob Davies wrote:
> Hi Eric,
>
> I'm not aware of anyone who has done this - but if flock() is supported it
> should work - if its going to fail - it will fail quickly (within a few
> minutes).
> Please let us know if it works!
OK to follow up on this, I've got tw
On 20 Jul 2009, at 18:00, Eric Gearhart wrote:
Wow that subject line was a mouthful!
OK back to the question... we are trying to setup a highly available
ActiveMQ implementation. Reading over what I've read on ActiveMQ's
website, I think I can accomplish this best using a shared filesystem
app
Wow that subject line was a mouthful!
OK back to the question... we are trying to setup a highly available
ActiveMQ implementation. Reading over what I've read on ActiveMQ's
website, I think I can accomplish this best using a shared filesystem
approach.
We have a pair of Windows SQL servers that