what you want to use is ActiveMQ http://activemq.apache.org/networks-of-brokers.html network of brokers . This provides an "active/active" setup with both HA and scalability...
"This allows a client to connect to any broker in the network - and fail over to another broker if there is a failure - providing from the clients perspective a HA cluster of brokers." BASE Logic, Inc. wrote: > > I am trying to determine the best approach for a CXF message input > application taking POJO event objects from a farm of applications. 400k to > 600k messages per day right now, but growing to 1.5M to 3M in the next > 12-18 > months. > > I think that 1 machine can handle the load at this point, but I want a > fail-over. However, this would mean that one machine only gets used if the > other one goes down. > > So, is it prudent to use the fan-out to dual servers, and if one goes > down, > then other is picking up the slack anyways, and our WILY alerts us when > the > server is down? > > Or is there another strategy I should use for AMQ load balancing and > fail-over? > > > --- > Thank You… > > Mick Knutson, President > > BASE Logic, Inc. > Enterprise Architecture, Design, Mentoring & Agile Consulting > p. (855) BASE-LOGIC: (227-3564-42) > p. (478) BASE-LOGIC (227-3564-42) > f. (855) BASE-LOGIC: (227-3564-42) > > Website: http://www.baselogic.com > Blog: http://www.baselogic.com/blog/ > Linked IN: http://linkedin.com/in/mickknutson > Twitter: http://twitter.com/mickknutson > --- > ----- Ben O'Day IT Consultant -http://consulting-notes.com -- View this message in context: http://camel.465427.n5.nabble.com/Slightly-off-topic-choosing-fan-out-verse-fail-over-for-activeMQ-destinations-tp4517579p4519420.html Sent from the Camel - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
