activemq-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "James Strachan" <james.strac...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [Un]reliable:// network of AMQ brokers with Lingo
Date Wed, 07 Jun 2006 16:45:45 GMT
On 6/7/06, red3 <alan.biggs@aeso.ca> wrote:
>
> Thanks for your response, James.
>
> What are the known problems with the existing networks-of-brokers strategy

Its a long story; but basically lots of bugs have been fixed since 3.x

> and why was it necessary to introduce the master-slave strategy?

Master/Slave is quite different to Networks. Networks are about
storing and forwarding messages from broker to broker. Master/Slave is
about replicating messages to a pair of brokers so that if a broker
goes down the other is a hot standby and can failover fast (which
seems to be what folks want most of the time).

In the 3.x days folks would often use networks when they really wanted
master/slave


> What if we wanted more than two brokers in a master-slave configuration? Is
> this possible?

You can have pairs of master/slave brokers in a network. But we don't
support more than 1 slave right now.

> After a master goes down, how do you intend that it is restarted? Manually?

So the slave becomes the master automatically. If you want to bring
the old master back online later on - it will be out of sync so you
have to take the slave down, copy its files to the old master then
restart the old master. Thats a manual process right now.

-- 

James
-------
http://radio.weblogs.com/0112098/

Mime
View raw message