I'd just like to echo what Viswanath just said - it sounds like relying on a JDBC based master/slave is your best bet.
Note that Master/Slave is used for message replication and master/slave failover - networks of brokers is purely about store and forward of messages - not replication. You may want to look at a replicated database such as Oracle RAC or something if you want to avoid message loss in a severe hardware failure type situation. On 30/11/2007, Viswanath Durbha <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hi, > > I can answer one of the many questions you had regarding master/slave setup. > > I use ActiveMQ 5.0 snapshot version and I have successfully setup a > master/slave configuration using MySQL database. I followed the instructions > at http://activemq.apache.org/jdbc-master-slave.html > http://activemq.apache.org/jdbc-master-slave.html . > > The master first locks the database and the slave is in waiting mode. If the > master goes down for any reason, the slave automatically comes up without > any manual intervention. So this slave becomes the new master. There can be > as many instances of ActiveMQ as needed all waiting for the database lock. > This would take care of the High Availability (HA). > > The same can also be achieved using a shared network drive (SAN). The > details can be found at > http://activemq.apache.org/shared-file-system-master-slave.html > http://activemq.apache.org/shared-file-system-master-slave.html > > Hope this helps. > > Thanks, > Viswanath > > > gfrank wrote: > > > > After reading as much as possible on this subject both on the ActiveMQ > > wiki and here in the forum there are a few questions remaining. Hopefully > > someone here can provide advice and/or cautions. > > > > Background: I'm working on a message processing system that must have > > guaranteed order of delivery and no message loss. This system has a human > > safety impact so conservative choices are best. Throughput and load > > balancing for performance purposes are the lowest priorities compared to > > solid reliability and resilience. > > > > Questions: > > > > First, i see that recovery from a failed Master in a Master/Slave > > configuration requires both some manual intervention in moving the message > > store from the slave to the master as well as some incurred downtime due > > to a restart of all the brokers. Is there a road-map item to address this > > situation and simplify the recovery process ... hopefully making it > > automatic? Has anyone here experienced this in production as it is > > currently coded now and if so, how well does it work? > > > > How about alternatives to the Master/Slave choice. Is there any way to > > provide message replication for safety purposes within a network of > > brokers? For example, is there any option using a network of brokers and > > a single shared JDBC message store across multiple brokers? I know that > > this just makes the JDBC store a new single point of failure but there are > > off-the-shelf database cluster solutions which can help address that > > issue. > > > > Finally, does anyone have experience with how Master/Slave and Network of > > Brokers holdup under the circumstance of network failure within the > > cluster causing multiple Masters, etc? I'm concerned about situations > > that can lead to duplicate message processing and/or out-of-order > > messages. > > > > Thanks for any advice, > > Greg > > > > -- > View this message in context: > http://www.nabble.com/looking-for-best-practices-for-High-Availability-and-guaranteed-message-delivery-tf4900564s2354.html#a14042472 > Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > > -- James ------- http://macstrac.blogspot.com/ Open Source Integration http://open.iona.com
