JDBC Isn’t replicated, it picks the first master as the one that locks the DB
, but offers you another way of scaling (albeit slower) the security of message persistence to say a commercial RDBMS or open source cluster. It is also allows you to do master slave without a “san” - something many companies still do :) Is it as fast as Kaha or Level, no not even remotely close. On Tue, Jan 6, 2015 at 2:27 AM, James Green <james.mk.gr...@gmail.com> wrote: > Looking at http://activemq.apache.org/persistence.html and wondering about > building a cluster of brokers for high availability. > Seems JDBC was implemented quite some time ago and has been eclipsed by > KahaDB and now LevelDB but these are local only. There's something very > shiny and new about LevelDB replication but I'm interpreting this as > potentially too new for a production environment. > So is the advice for those needing replicated stores still to use JDBC? > Just point a number of brokers at the same connection or what? > James
