activemq-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From seij...@gmail.com
Subject Re: Is JDBC still used?
Date Tue, 06 Jan 2015 16:32:09 GMT
JDBC Isn’t replicated, it picks the first master as the one that locks the DB

, but offers you another way of scaling (albeit slower) the security 

of message persistence to say a commercial RDBMS or open source cluster.

It is also allows you to do master slave without a “san” - something many companies

still do :)




Is it as fast as Kaha or Level, no not even remotely close.

On Tue, Jan 6, 2015 at 2:27 AM, James Green <james.mk.green@gmail.com>
wrote:

> Looking at http://activemq.apache.org/persistence.html and wondering about
> building a cluster of brokers for high availability.
> Seems JDBC was implemented quite some time ago and has been eclipsed by
> KahaDB and now LevelDB but these are local only. There's something very
> shiny and new about LevelDB replication but I'm interpreting this as
> potentially too new for a production environment.
> So is the advice for those needing replicated stores still to use JDBC?
> Just point a number of brokers at the same connection or what?
> James
Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message