Return-Path: X-Original-To: apmail-activemq-dev-archive@www.apache.org Delivered-To: apmail-activemq-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 52C8BDBA2 for ; Thu, 8 Nov 2012 14:02:33 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 80141 invoked by uid 500); 8 Nov 2012 14:02:33 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-activemq-dev-archive@activemq.apache.org Received: (qmail 80027 invoked by uid 500); 8 Nov 2012 14:02:33 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@activemq.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: dev@activemq.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list dev@activemq.apache.org Received: (qmail 79998 invoked by uid 99); 8 Nov 2012 14:02:32 -0000 Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (192.87.106.230) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 08 Nov 2012 14:02:32 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.5 required=5.0 tests=HTML_MESSAGE,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of chirino@gmail.com designates 74.125.83.43 as permitted sender) Received: from [74.125.83.43] (HELO mail-ee0-f43.google.com) (74.125.83.43) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 08 Nov 2012 14:02:25 +0000 Received: by mail-ee0-f43.google.com with SMTP id c13so1662079eek.2 for ; Thu, 08 Nov 2012 06:02:05 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:date:x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject :from:to:content-type; bh=stZzDt/VBG/ey2plor32LQON//CE5UFWJwATrAHurbs=; b=w/bCTRL6jO1mDjAn3kk03mL0wJO0aPaD3fubSjqgBJtfigY/3eJwBoxdKMg/0SBs9f I6tlBrPlM18UIRVkKQydX6ndRNMojM9zP6g1Y9GVpvpcI4znNs9Juq/s9AFnlzC985Jz Ywh3A2vOVvXjY4sotuplQOIUOWk06FNVtk0r431jDtk9WCnLA/ccAiAWGFhm1QZnjgcI DVnGDKYQuU1x1/ZW5QdLQcIRekPgRocyEaoRTTlrhzW+beMsXFUtowe2J6m/xNTvFoPh PlJBz9nuVphCtSRDPj3ud2wxaWQXIqwllz3cqGa5ODwQMPZAtqikOOuVaynY8R7ez8zs VScA== MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.14.207.68 with SMTP id m44mr27542497eeo.40.1352383325067; Thu, 08 Nov 2012 06:02:05 -0800 (PST) Sender: chirino@gmail.com Received: by 10.14.4.200 with HTTP; Thu, 8 Nov 2012 06:02:05 -0800 (PST) Date: Thu, 8 Nov 2012 09:02:05 -0500 X-Google-Sender-Auth: pnRgGT46LWg2_eFX_x1BJUxB9PA Message-ID: Subject: Dropping pure master/slave support from 5.8 From: Hiram Chirino To: ActiveMQ-Developers Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=047d7b3a7fe2b0d88d04cdfc47bd X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org --047d7b3a7fe2b0d88d04cdfc47bd Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 How do you guys feel about dropping pure master/slave support from 5.8? Pure master/slave adds lots of complexity to the broker implementation yet I've never been able to recommend anyone use it in production due to it's limitations. M/S based on shared storage is fast, and most importantly very reliable. So I think we clean house a remove this 'feature'. -- ** *Hiram Chirino* *Engineering | Red Hat, Inc.* *hchirino@redhat.com | fusesource.com | redhat.com* *skype: hiramchirino | twitter: @hiramchirino * *blog: Hiram Chirino's Bit Mojo * --047d7b3a7fe2b0d88d04cdfc47bd--