AD-16 wrote: > > Hello, > I am relatively new to activemq and I am trying to find the optimal setup > for a failover cluster of brokers. What i have is the following > > 2 physical servers each running a broker > 2 physical servers each running a consumer > 1 Java application implementing JMS API producer which will likely use > failover:// protocol. > > I am trying to figure out from the docs the recommended failover > approach. > I dont have a SAN but I will have NFS, however it seems there are some > locking issues with using NFS as a shared storage. > > What i would ideally like is a basic master/slave setup where all > consumers > connect to master and then fail over to the slave ( I understand current > release does not support failing back to primary) in addition to message > persistence so no messages are lost if they are unprocessed on the master > queue. > > Any recommendations here? > > Thanks > Adam > >
I like "Pure Master/Slave", because you'll have a copy on each server. Unless you have very reliable shared storage, of course. If you cannot afford occasional downtime when a broker dies (e.g. hardware failure), shared storage might be a better choice. Or find a JMS provider that supports failback. If the consumers store their result in a database (or some other transactional application), use XA transactions (2-phase commit). If storage fails, the message should go back to the queue where it came from (both transactions rolled back) and the other consumer will attempt to process the same message. Hans -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Failover---Persistence-tp18602326p18604338.html Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
