activemq-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Jamie McCrindle" <jamiemccrin...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [ANN] Apache ActiveMQ 4.1 released!
Date Wed, 06 Dec 2006 15:38:06 GMT
heh, it was the thread where you said "use a different database" :) here's
the fix message:

http://www.mail-archive.com/activemq-users@geronimo.apache.org/msg03257.html

> I don't remember I'm afraid - I do remember a fix going in for pure
> JDBC Master/Slave for MySQL. I"m not sure if the pure JDBC
> Master/Slave has been tested yet for SQL Server - fancy trying it out?
> :)

Happy to! Just wanted to know if I was buying myself some trouble without
the locking support.

Congrats again and looking forward to using 4.1
j.

On 12/6/06, James Strachan <james.strachan@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On 12/6/06, Jamie McCrindle <jamiemccrindle@gmail.com> wrote:
> > first off, congratulations,
>
> Thanks!
>
> > second, i recall there being an issue with locking on SQL Server for
> pure
> > JDBC Master / Save and that you added a fix in to be able to turn off
> row
> > based locking when using SQL Server.
>
> I don't remember I'm afraid - I do remember a fix going in for pure
> JDBC Master/Slave for MySQL. I"m not sure if the pure JDBC
> Master/Slave has been tested yet for SQL Server - fancy trying it out?
> :)
>
> Basically if you startup 2 brokers, one should hang while the other is
> the master - then killing the master should cause a failover.
>
> --
>
> James
> -------
> http://radio.weblogs.com/0112098/
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message