activemq-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Idzerda, Edan" <>
Subject RE: Feasibility of Shared File System Master Slave using NFSv4
Date Thu, 19 May 2011 18:38:40 GMT
I think that's kinda funny, really.  ActiveMQ's website has a warning about potential problems
with locking under NFSv3,
and IBM MQ's similar "multi-instance" mode *requires* NFSv4 for "proper lock handling." 

I only briefly tested AMQ's master-slave using NFSv3 and it worked well-enough in simple test
cases.  FWIW, we ended up going with a single server so we could use the SAN directly and
relied on VmWare for a relatively quick recovery from a server failure.

-----Original Message-----
From: johneboyer [] 
Sent: Thursday, May 19, 2011 2:04 PM
Subject: Feasibility of Shared File System Master Slave using NFSv4

I’m planning to implement the shared file system master slave using NFSv4 on Ubuntu (lucid)
server. However, my Linux consultant is telling me that it’s not going to work and has refused
to waste time setting it up because he says the exclusive locking will not work.

Is he correct? Does anyone have experience successfully configuring shared file system master
slave using NFSv4?

Thank you for your time.

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

***Note:The information contained in this message may be privileged
and confidential and protected from disclosure. If the reader of
this message is not the intended recipient, or an employee or agent
responsible for delivering this message to the intended recipient,
you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or
copying of this communication is strictly prohibited.  If you have
received this communication in error, please notify the Sender
immediately by replying to the message and deleting it from your
computer.  Thank you.  Premier Inc.
View raw message