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: JDBC Master Slave
Date Tue, 12 Dec 2006 13:55:28 GMT
On 12/12/06, Anthrope <pn@anthrope.com> wrote:
> Thanks for this information; it clarifies things. On to the next question
> now. I was able to get ActiveMQ to use a MySQL repository, and noticed that
> there were three tables created:
>
> ACTIVEMQ_ACKS
> ACTIVEMQ_LOCK
> activemq_msgs

Looks about right.

> I ran a producer and dumped 10 messages onto a queue (without consuming
> them), but saw nothing in the activemq_msgs table.

You're definitely using the <jdbcPersistenceAdapter/> element right?
i.e. not using the journal

http://incubator.apache.org/activemq/jdbc-master-slave.html


> I assume this is probably
> because the server caches a certain amount before needing to use the
> database. What I was a bit surprised by was the fact that there was one row
> in the ACTIVEMQ_LOCK table (which has 3 columns, ID, TIME and BROKER_NAME),
> which had 1 for the ID column, and NULLs for TIME and BROKER_NAME columns.
> Is that what we ought to expect?

Yeah, that sounds right.

> If it is, then I'd hazard a guess that each
> broker will have to have its own database instance. Is that correct?

Each group of 1 master and N slaves shares a single database instance.
Or another way of saying that is each master requires its own database
instance
-- 

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

Mime
View raw message