My definition of a cluster is that a given message is available (without forwarding) from all nodes in the cluster and will remain available when a single node in the cluster is lost. Master-slave pairs are clusters (but not active-active clusters) under that definition, while a network of brokers is not.
So Andi, is that the definition you were using when you wrote this question? Tim On Dec 6, 2017 5:35 AM, "Alec Henninger" <alechennin...@gmail.com> wrote: > Isn't network of brokers an active-active cluster? > > On Tue, Dec 5, 2017, 5:21 PM Tim Bain <tb...@alumni.duke.edu> wrote: > > > Not with ActiveMQ 5.x, since it doesn't have a capacity to do an > > active-active cluster, but ActiveMQ Artemis can. Have you looked at it? > > > > Tim > > > > On Dec 5, 2017 7:28 AM, "andi welchlin" <andi.welch...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > Hello, > > > > > > I would like to setup a active-active cluster of brokers using > ActiveMq. > > > > > > But I also would like to connect single ActiveMq satellite brokers to > > this > > > cluster while they should share some queues and exchanges. So this will > > be > > > pretty much like a federation between some satellite brokers and a > > central > > > broker cluster. Clients will connect to these satellite brokers using > > AMQP. > > > > > > Do you think this would be possible using ActiveMq? > > > > > > Kind Regards, > > > Andreas > > > > > >
