activemq-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Dejan Bosanac <de...@nighttale.net>
Subject Re: Running ActiveMQ and having a database failover
Date Wed, 14 Apr 2010 15:45:07 GMT
Hi,

if you're sure that only one broker will use database, you can try
setting useDatabaseLock to false

Cheers
--
Dejan Bosanac - http://twitter.com/dejanb

Open Source Integration - http://fusesource.com/
ActiveMQ in Action - http://www.manning.com/snyder/
Blog - http://www.nighttale.net


On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 5:31 PM, icfantv <adam.gordon@readytalk.com> wrote:

>
> That's a neat idea, but unfortunately for us it does not appear that
> Postgresql supports a failover parameter in the connection URL.
> Additionally, even if it did, it would depend on how it handled the
> failover
> so as to not cause ActiveMQ to puke.
>
> We use a floating IP address to point to the "primary" database server and
> use HA to failover to the "secondary" (by simply changing to where the
> floating IP address points) if the primary becomes unresponsive.
>
> I'm willing to bet that the problem here is that ActiveMQ uses an open
> transaction to "lock" the table or tables necessary to prevent a failover
> ActiveMQ server from taking over.
>
> If anyone else as any ideas/thoughts/solutions I would appreciate it.
> Thanks.
>
> --adam
> --
> View this message in context:
> http://old.nabble.com/Running-ActiveMQ-and-having-a-database-failover-tp28233397p28244251.html
> Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message