It worked perfectly. /Daniel
forda wrote: > > Thank you, i will try that instead. > Cheers > Daniel > > Dejan Bosanac wrote: >> >> Fir the shared master/slave setup you don't need to define any network >> connectors, but just simply point both brokers to the same database. >> >> Cheers >> -- >> Dejan Bosanac - http://twitter.com/dejanb >> >> Open Source Integration - http://fusesource.com/ >> ActiveMQ in Action - http://www.manning.com/snyder/ >> Blog - http://www.nighttale.net >> >> >> On Tue, Oct 20, 2009 at 8:20 AM, forda <daniel.forb...@bredband.net> >> wrote: >> >>> >>> I forgot to provide the logs. >>> >>> Host1 >>> http://www.nabble.com/file/p25970251/activemq.txt activemq.txt >>> http://www.nabble.com/file/p25970251/wrapper.txt wrapper.txt >>> >>> Host2 >>> http://www.nabble.com/file/p25970251/activemq.txt activemq.txt >>> http://www.nabble.com/file/p25970251/wrapper.log wrapper.log >>> >>> >>> Daniel >>> >>> >>> forda wrote: >>> > >>> > Hello ! >>> > >>> > Currently i am working for a customer to setup a ActiveMQ production >>> alike >>> > environment, >>> > designed for failover on the client or the server. Our first approach >>> is >>> > to use failover on >>> > the client and using a shared database building a Master/Slave >>> scenario >>> > having a database >>> > cluster. It works in way that is described and in another not, getting >>> > errors. I have carefully >>> > consulted various documentation on the internet, fusesource and the >>> > ActiveMQ in action book. >>> > These documentation are good, but sometimes a link is missing. >>> > >>> > In this case i tested out the >>> > Master/Slave approach first with static discovery and the failover >>> > property set to true. In 5.20 >>> > version of ActiveMQ the log says the failover property does not exist >>> > error in BeanCreation for >>> > DiscoveryNetworkConnector, had a look in the reference for Java and >>> XML >>> > and couldn'nt so i >>> > skipped it. Though it seem to work while the first broker gets the >>> lock >>> > and act as a master and >>> > the slaves waiting for acquire the lock. Then one of the brokers >>> shutdown >>> > one of the slaves took over. >>> > >>> > But when i looked in the logfiles i found som Error logs: connection >>> > refused to unknown. It doesent >>> > seem to be normal. Or ? I will attach the logs with this thread. >>> > >>> > Second i tried to use the multicast discovery isntead of using default >>> i >>> > wanted to define >>> > another name for the group, but unknown host exception. How do i >>> manage >>> to >>> > define another >>> > name than default to delimit the acess to group on the network? With >>> > default it's work. >>> > >>> > Am i missing something here to get the whole thing working. I am >>> gratful >>> > for all advices. >>> > Thanks in advance. >>> > >>> > Regards, >>> > >>> > Daniel >>> > >>> >>> -- >>> View this message in context: >>> http://www.nabble.com/Getting-Error-while-trying-to-achieve-the-Master-Slave-config-tp25960809p25970251.html >>> Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. >>> >>> >> >> >> ----- >> Dejan Bosanac >> >> Open Source Integration - http://fusesource.com/ >> ActiveMQ in Action - http://www.manning.com/snyder/ >> Blog - http://www.nighttale.net >> > > -- View this message in context: http://old.nabble.com/Getting-Error-while-trying-to-achieve-the-Master-Slave-config-tp25960809p26691622.html Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
