activemq-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Gary Tully <>
Subject Re: JDBC based Master/slave configuration
Date Wed, 01 Feb 2012 21:10:45 GMT
Would it be simpler to use different table names for each pair. So
just set the "tablePrefix" on the statements element in xml

On 31 January 2012 18:34, mikmela <> wrote:
> As it was mentioned  in
> "Its technically possible to patch the JDBC message store to include a
> broker ID column in all the tables to allow the same JDBC database to be
> used for multiple brokers..."
> Understanding all drawbacks of such approach,  we would like to use  "shared
> database instance" approach for multiple master/slave groups of brokers as a
> default configuration to simplify client's burden in administration of our
> product. Our software allowing to create/configure multiple brokers in
> master/slave groups dynamically via GUI. The problem is the current ActiveMQ
> master/slave default implementation requires a separate database instance
> for each master/slave group.
> I was wondering if someone has implemented somethinng like this?
> Looking into the source I can see that most of the SQL statements will need
> to be customized... This, seems, can be done via <statements> element in
> configuration xml... Possibly,  we'll need own jdbcadapter similar to
> SybaseJDBCAdapter or OracleJDBCAdapter, or just extend
> JDBCPersistenceAdapter. DefaultDatabaseLocker might require to be extended
> as well... Is this correct assessment, or much more is involved?
> I'd appreciate any help on this matter...
> --
> View this message in context:
> Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailing list archive at


View raw message