At this point using multiple backups will preclude fail-back from working as generally expected so the behavior you're seeing is expected.
Out of curiosity, are you using shared-storage or replication? If you're using replication keep in mind that you'll want at least 3 master/slave pairs to achieve a valid quorum to mitigate the risk of split-brain. Justin On Wed, Jun 5, 2019 at 4:34 PM ahuhatwork <ahuhatw...@protonmail.com> wrote: > I just want to confirm that this is the expected behaviour. I have 1 master > with 3 slaves (the brokers are hosted on VMs that tend to randomly die). > I'm > currently testing this on the latest source code from github. > > Here's the scenario: > 1) Start master > 2) Start slave1 > 3) Start slave2 > 4) Kill master, slave1 takes over as the live server > 5) Bring back master > > Configuration snippet for master: > > > Configuration snippet for slave1 and slave2: > > > At this point, which server is the live server? I would think that due to > failback being configured, the master would resume being the live server. > It > seems that slave1 stays on as the live server. Is this the expected > behaviour? > > > > > -- > Sent from: > http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/ActiveMQ-User-f2341805.html >
