I can't comment on the second question, but it's normally recommended to run the slave broker on a different *host*. Usually you want a slave because you want redundancy to protect you from failure of all types: machines dying, machines getting overloaded by other processes running on them, network failures, etc. You give up all of that if you run on the same host, in addition to the behavior you observed.
Tim On Jun 18, 2015 7:32 AM, "prince.jose" <princejose...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi, > > We are on active MQ 5.9.1 version and we are running a JDBC Master Slave > with Lease Database locker. The back end is Oracle (11g rel2) database. > Yesterday there was a scenario where the master lost the database > connection > and lost the lock lease. The slave got the lock in couple of seconds and > tried to open the transports but failed to do so with a > java.net.BindException: Address already in use Error. We were using the > same > set of ports for master and slave and cleraly the master could not shutdown > the ports on time for the slave to come up. is it advisable to use the same > set of ports in a master /slave topology? > > Secondly, to be able to autorecover from database failover, we have > configured the broker with a JDBCIOException handler. not sure if i have > configured it properly to achieve auto recovery, please have a look on the > below configuration and correct me if I have done something wrong here? > > activemq.xml > <http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/file/n4697946/activemq.xml> > > > > > > > -- > View this message in context: > http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/Active-MQ-JDBC-Master-Slave-using-Lease-Database-Locker-tp4697946.html > Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. >
