> after all three start, only journal replication is only seen on one of the > slaves, i.e., the "active" slave.
That's expected. > when the original master is restarted, the first "active" slave (the current > master) will stay as the live broker even with "allow-failback" set to true That's also expected. Fail-back doesn't actually occur when multiple backups are configured. When the 3 broker instances are started there will be 1 live-backup pair and a "left-over" backup will be in a kind of idle state waiting to attach to a suitable live broker. Then if the live broker instance fails its backup will take over and become live and the other backup will now become the backup of the broker which just became live. Once the broker instance which failed is restarted it will attempt to register itself as a backup of the now-live broker and initiate fail-back. However, since the now-live broker already has a backup it will reject the registration message from the original live because it already has a backup, and therefore fail-back will not occur. > if the "active" slave was killed first, the secondary/"passive" slave is not > able to take over as the "active" slave Can you elaborate on this use-case a bit more? How are you stopping the backup? Justin ----- Original Message ----- From: "Lei" <lehu...@paypal.com> To: users@activemq.apache.org Sent: Tuesday, May 9, 2017 6:27:44 PM Subject: problems with master slave set up artemis 2.0 I have a master slave non-colocation set up of one master and two slaves. 1. after all three start, only journal replication is only seen on one of the slaves, i.e., the "active" slave. 2. try to simulate the failover scenarios. scenario A: - when the master is killed, the "active" slave comes up OK, and the other "passive" slave becomes the "active" slave - when the original master is restarted, the first "active" slave (the current master) will stay as the live broker even with "allow-failback" set to true scenario B: - if the "active" slave was killed first, the secondary/"passive" slave is not able to take over as the "active" slave - only when the "passive" slave is restarted, it can become the "active" slave to the master. Is this by design? Or anything wrong with my configuration? The configurations are attached. Thanks, Lei broker.slave <http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/file/n4725854/broker.slave> broker.master <http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/file/n4725854/broker.master> -- View this message in context: http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/problems-with-master-slave-set-up-artemis-2-0-tp4725854.html Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
