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: High Availability and Network Of Brokers
Date Thu, 08 Feb 2007 08:06:59 GMT
Yes, Master/Slave is the answer for high availability and to avoid
message loss if a broker dies.


On 2/7/07, spiderman2 <shawn.gandhi@bridgewatersystems.com> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I'm a New user. I'd like to use activemq for a Network Of Brokers /
> Clustered deployment. The catch is that I can't afford to loose a single
> message in the event of failure.
>
> In the Network of Brokers topology, I'm reading this isn't possible:
>
> "At any point in time the message will only exist in one broker's store at
> once until its consumed. In the future we will support high availability
> brokers using a master-slave protocol where we willl replicate a message on
> to a number of slave brokers for hot standby if the master broker were to be
> unavailable for a certain period of time."
> http://activemq.apache.org/how-do-distributed-queues-work.html
> http://activemq.apache.org/how-do-distributed-queues-work.html
>
>
> Today, is there a way to have High availability with a clustered approach?
> Should I just use a Master/Slave instead?
>
>
> Shawn
> --
> View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/High-Availability-and-Network-Of-Brokers-tf3189661s2354.html#a8854295
> Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
>


-- 

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

Mime
View raw message