activemq-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "" <>
Subject Re: Failover and Fail BACK
Date Mon, 12 Apr 2010 22:05:52 GMT

Hello there, 
NFS v3 is NOT required.  The problem identified is a failure in lock
management due to SOME implementations of NFS v3 having "soft" locking.  If
your kernel supports "i'm serious, I'm locking you mr. file" AND you put the
correct settings on your server and client to ensure that you never have
hung locks it will all work fine.

Settings example:
in /etc/exports on server:
/messages *(secure,rw,sync,no_root_squash)

in /etc/fstab on clients:
nas:/messages           /messages       nfs    

ttmgary wrote:
> Are you using NFS 4.x? I understand that is required.
> Gary
> wrote:
>> Hello there! We are using 5.3.1 deployed as a HA failover cluster via an
>> NFS mount.
>> We are able to kill a broker (which we are calling the HOT broker) and
>> get a second broker (or COLD broker) to take over with only a few
>> messages lost in transition (353 out of 1.3 Million) which are chalking
>> up to "was in transit in memory on the way to the NFS server". However,
>> if we restart the HOT broker it waits for the exclusive lock and if we
>> kill the COLD broker (which is then the live broker) we get what looks
>> like either KahaDB or persistent-store corruption and are unable to
>> continue until we stop both brokers, rm -rf the store/data directory then
>> restart the HOT broker.
>> Has anyone else seen this issue? Anyone know what we could do to make it
>> fail BACK to HOT without failure?
>> Next up for us will be HA failover with network of brokers and we'll post
>> how we did it with an NFS mount when we get it to work!
>> Thank you all!
>> Steve Mays

View this message in context:
Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailing list archive at

View raw message