activemq-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Bruce Ritchie <bruce.ritc...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Artemis question on JMS clustered topic and high availability
Date Wed, 11 Jan 2017 22:27:52 GMT
Thanks for the response. The paired LiveA/BackupB + LiveB/BackupA is what I
was wondering out with the JMS clustered topic. I'd like to not rely on
infrastructure to restart because of the latency that involves - I'd like
to keep any hiccups to < 1 sec if possible.

On Wed, Jan 11, 2017 at 1:46 PM, Clebert Suconic <clebert.suconic@gmail.com>
wrote:

> You are using AWS. Do you have the storage disk? or is it transient?
>
>
> What I have been suggesting to cloud user is to just monitor their
> system, and have the system restarting itself in case of a failure.
> That is the best scenario you can get since the infra-structure would
> give you the needed HA.
>
>
> If you don't, you will need to setup a backup/live pair for each system.
>
>
> The only difference is that you can do that with just 2 boxes...
>
> Box1: LiveA and BackupB
> Box2: LiveB and BackupA
>
>
> That's a possible example / solution.
>
>
>
> We have a colocated topology that was developed for wildfly or
> embedded systems, but I would recommend you keeping it as simple as
> possible... either have the infra-structure restarting itself if you
> have the storage... or have a backup pair like I'm suggesting here.
>
>
>
>
> I feel like I missed answering something here.. let me know if I am...
>
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, Jan 11, 2017 at 12:07 PM, Bruce Ritchie <bruce.ritchie@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > Your reply is much appreciated. So crossing master/slave is only possible
> > in a colocated environment? If so I think that's doable in my situation.
> >
> > "what you are looking is having a copy of the topic subscription on every
> > node, making it a single cluster among different nodes,"
> >
> > Is there an example of this I can work from? I previously was working
> from
> > the example @
> > https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/tree/1.x/
> examples/features/clustered/clustered-topic
> >
> >
> > Thanks!
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Jan 11, 2017 at 11:53 AM, Clebert Suconic <
> clebert.suconic@gmail.com
> >> wrote:
> >
> >> when you have a topic subscription in cluster.. the message will be
> >> copied to every subscription on the cluster connection (or network of
> >> brokers)...
> >>
> >>
> >> When you have the same subscription among different nodes.. (that
> >> is... the same core-queue name on more than one node), then
> >> load-balancing will have a play...
> >>
> >>
> >> what you are looking is having a copy of the topic subscription on
> >> every node, making it a single cluster among different nodes, and
> >> that's not what you have here. You would need a backup to save the
> >> acks between two servers.
> >>
> >>
> >> you can have multiple master/slaves on your environment, and even
> >> cross them on a colocated environment, having a phisical server with 2
> >> live nodes in case of failures.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Don't know if that helps?
> >>
> >> On Tue, Jan 3, 2017 at 2:30 PM, Bruce Ritchie <bruce.ritchie@gmail.com>
> >> wrote:
> >> > I've been investigating switching from a single activemq server to a
> >> > cluster of artemis servers on aws and I have a question on clustered
> jms
> >> > topics and high availability.
> >> >
> >> > Firstly, I like the idea that the producers/consumers can connect to
> any
> >> > node in the cluster and fail over (client side) to a different node
> if a
> >> > node goes down without loosing any messages with the understanding
> that
> >> the
> >> > producers may have to retry submissions.
> >> >
> >> > In my usage scenario I do not have any queues - just two jms topics.
> >> > Multiple producers, multiple consumers. What I've been trying to
> figure
> >> out
> >> > is if I can away with not having a <ha-policy>. The clustered topic
> >> example
> >> > seems to indicate that with a message-load-balancing set to STRICT
> that
> >> > it'll copy messages to other nodes in the cluster if a corresponding
> >> topic
> >> > already exists there. My understanding from reading the docs is that
> >> this a
> >> > true copy (potentially async I assume) vs something like a
> read-through
> >> > from one node to another when the message doesn't exist on the local
> >> node.
> >> > Is that correct?
> >> >
> >> > If the above is correct and the fact that I don't have a requirement
> to
> >> be
> >> > able to recover messages after a full cluster restart is there any
> reason
> >> > to have a ha-policy set? The only reason I can think of is to sync
> >> messages
> >> > in the topic between shutdown and restart of a node in the cluster
> prior
> >> to
> >> > clients reconnecting to that node so that the client(s) may not miss
> >> > messages (potential dup are ok in my use case). That's pretty
> important
> >> but
> >> > I'm not sure I have can both the clustered jms topics in a symmetrical
> >> > cluster and have a ha-policy (ala [master0/slave1] <-->
> >> [master1/slave0]).
> >> > Is that possible?
> >> >
> >> > Thanks!
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> Clebert Suconic
> >>
>
>
>
> --
> Clebert Suconic
>

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