bump :)
ikbenben wrote: > > Hey James, > > thanks for the feedback. i had read the docs. > > just to be sure i am understanding correctly, suppose we have 2 jboss > nodes in a cluster, both with activemq-ra.rar and jbossweb-tomcat55.sar > deployed. then, when the 1st node is started, both the activemq and > tomcat modules will complete their startup correctly and be available. > however, when the 2nd node is started, it will hang indefinitely while it > tries to get a db lock for active mq and the tomcat module will never be > available. this applies to any other services that have been deployed in > the cluster (ie jndi, webservices, scheduling, etc...) > > if this is true, then it seems like there is not any reason or advantage > to embed activemq in a jboss cluster. > > i would have thought it would behave similar to how ha-jms works in jboss. > all servers in the cluster complete their startup sequence completely but > only a first node to be started in the cluster has the active jms > provider. the other nodes in the cluster have a proxy to that first node > so any requests to the local jms gets redirected to the first node's jms > provider. in the end all the other deployed services on every jboss node > are available. > > am i understanding things correct? what is the typical architecture then > if i have a web application deployed in a jboss cluster that needs to use > jms and i want that jms provider to be active mq? > > btw, the whole reason for this is that jbossMQ has issues and most people > have migrated to activeMQ instead. > > cheers > ben > > > James.Strachan wrote: >> >> On 11/11/2007, ikbenben <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> >>> hey all, >>> >>> i've got a question regarding the behaviour of using the >>> jdbcPersistenceAdaptor. i have deployed ActiveMQ into a clustered JBoss >>> 4.0.5 environment. I basically have 2 JBoss servers, each of which has >>> the >>> ActiveMQ RAR deployed. I've attached the broker xml file for reference: >>> http://www.nabble.com/file/p13696937/broker.xml broker.xml >>> >>> When i start up the JBoss servers, the first server comes up correctly >>> but >>> the second jboss instance hangs during start up while it is trying to >>> get a >>> lock on the database (activemq). when i shut down server one, the >>> second >>> instance continues and finishes the start up. is this how it should >>> behave? >> >> Yes - the first broker to start is the master, it locks the database - >> the others are slaves. >> >> http://activemq.apache.org/jdbc-master-slave.html >> >> If you don't want the brokers to be a master/slave cluster, then just >> use a different database for each broker; though then you probably >> will want to network your brokers together to make a store and forward >> network. >> >> >>> the reason i'm asking was i intended to deploy a EAR file in the jboss >>> instance on each server which would use activemq tp send messages to >>> other >>> applications. however, if the second instance doesn't come up ever then >>> this won't work as i need to ensure i have clustering working on the EAR >>> level. >> >> So either run your master/slave brokers separately to your jboss >> servers (e.g. running the bin/activemq command) or try figure out how >> to do an async start in jboss, or run the brokers in separate jboss >> servers? Note that the RAR can connect to a remote broker - it doesn't >> need to boot up an ActiveMQ broker >> >> -- >> James >> ------- >> http://macstrac.blogspot.com/ >> >> Open Source SOA >> http://open.iona.com >> >> > > -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/jdbcPersistence-behaviour-tp13696937s2354p14298283.html Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
