activemq-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Anthrope ...@anthrope.com>
Subject Re: JDBC Master Slave
Date Tue, 12 Dec 2006 21:16:16 GMT

Okay,
     So we've apparently run into a MySQL-related idisyncracy. The tables
that ActiveMQ was creating were of the MyISAM type, which doesn't support
SELECT FOR UPDATE semantics. We converted the tables to INNODB table types,
and it worked like a charm. On to the next issue, which involves providing
some form of load balancing.

Regards,
Prashanth


Jack Leung wrote:
> 
> I have been following this thread and tried the same example. I cannot get
> multiple "master" brokers to start either. It seems the locking does not
> work. I agree that the behavior demonstrated is not consistent with the
> documentation.
> 
> So maybe this feature is not production ready, or has not been tested yet?
> 
> Jack
> 
> 
> Anthrope wrote:
>> 
>> Something is surely not right. The logical sequence should be that the
>> broker first attempt to acquire the lock before starting any services. My
>> config file is exactly what is specified in the example, and the
>> behaviour I see is not what I expect. 
>> 
>> Has anyone actually got this configuration to work?
>> 
>> As regards the client dying, the only information I have is that a
>> JMSException occurred. I'd have posted other information if I'd had it.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> James.Strachan wrote:
>>> 
>>> On 12/12/06, Anthrope <pn@anthrope.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> James,
>>>>     Thanks for the response. I am using the config file as-is from the
>>>> example. I am using the jdbcPersistenceAdapter element, and here's what
>>>> I
>>>> have:
>>>>
>>>> - I start activemq on port 5616 and it duly starts up, taking over as
>>>> the
>>>> master
>>>> - I start a second instance with exactly the same configuration, and it
>>>> fails to start, because it tries to bind to 5616
>>>> - I change the configuration to use port 5626,
>>> 
>>> This sounds like something is not working correctly as a slave should
>>> not try to bind to a socket until it becomes the master.
>>> 
>>>> - I don't quite understand how both end up becoming the master, but
>>>> perhaps
>>>> it's just how it's being logged?
>>> 
>>> No - sounds like you're not using a shared database between the two.
>>> 
>>> 
>>>> - I kill the master broker and then run the consumer example with the
>>>> failover uri and am able to successfully extract about 7800 messages
>>>> before
>>>> the client shuts down with a JMS exception
>>> 
>>> What exception?
>>> 
>>> -- 
>>> 
>>> James
>>> -------
>>> http://radio.weblogs.com/0112098/
>>> 
>>> 
>> 
>> 
> 
> 

-- 
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/JDBC-Master-Slave-tf2792225.html#a7841893
Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.


Mime
View raw message