Pure master/slave was removed as not production ready, and since they already found something production-ready that would work with less effort (leveldb). I don't think they will develop the option of having similar functionality with kahadb as well, what's the purpose of maintaining 2 separate solutions in the same program to get exactly the same results? It's purely a waste of time imho. If you're interested in a fully replicated message db, at the moment the way to go is definitely leveldb.
> Yes, I agree/understand that nothing provides real time anyway. What I > meant > was I didn't want to rely on shared network storage for primary (master) > and > failover (slave) broker. Instead, I was looking for a configuration wherein > slave broker will have its own local persistent store and replicate data > from the master broker. Is there anything like this available with kahadb > based persistent store? > > I saw that such fully-replicated shared-nothing master/slave configuration > was present earlier (http://activemq.apache.org/pure-master-slave.html) > but > removed in ActiveMQ-5.8. I realize that there is a replicated shared > nothing > leveldb store but wanted to check if there is something like that with > kahadb based store (that uses zookeeper or something else for deciding the > master)? > > I also came across http://activemq.apache.org/kahadb-master-slave.html > which > says such support is under review, I am not sure about its status. > > If such support is not available, I guess I will have to move to a leveldb > based persistence store instead of kahadb. > >
