activemq-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "James Strachan" <james.strac...@gmail.com>
Subject JDBC Master Slave with SQL Server (was Re: [ANN] Apache ActiveMQ 4.1 released!)
Date Wed, 06 Dec 2006 15:48:24 GMT
On 12/6/06, Jamie McCrindle <jamiemccrindle@gmail.com> wrote:
> 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

Thanks :)


> > 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.

It should be pretty simple to fix. We recently had a similar issue
with MySQL and the fix was just figuring out the right SQL to create
an exclusive lock on the table so we can implement master/slave
properly using JDBC. If you can figure out the right SQL that SQL
Server needs to create an exclusive table lock (and keep it open until
the connection dies) then it should be easy to patch the JDBC adapter

-- 

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

Mime
View raw message