activemq-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From andi welchlin <andi.welch...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Broker Federation with an Active-Active Broker Cluster
Date Tue, 12 Dec 2017 14:56:11 GMT
Hello Martyn,

thank you for your answer. It was helpful.

Yes, what you described is what I want to achieve ... but the cluster
should not run within the JVM it should be spread around different
locations worldwide.

So basically what I want to do in the cluster is what I read in one of your
links:

*Apache ActiveMQ Artemis cluster connections can be configured to only
distribute to other nodes if they have matching consumers.*
And to this cluster I would like to connect the satellite brokers.

Kind Regards,
Andreas


On Tue, Dec 12, 2017 at 11:29 AM, Martyn Taylor <mtaylor@redhat.com> wrote:

> Hi Andreas,
>
> If I understand correctly you're wanting to create a single cluster, with
> active-active style availability, with some satellite brokers?
>
> To set up an active/active style HA cluster in Artemis, you can use using
> co-located pairs[1].  Essentially what this is doing is creating a live and
> a backup broker in a single JVM.  Where the backup here is acting as the
> backup for node on a separate machine.  You can then add satellite brokers
> that get a view into the HA cluster.  You can control exactly which
> addresses are shared between your HA cluster and individual brokers by
> setting the address <address> on the cluster connection[2].
>
> [1] https://activemq.apache.org/artemis/docs/latest/ha.html
> [2] https://activemq.apache.org/artemis/docs/latest/clusters.html
>
> Thanks
> Martyn
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, Dec 12, 2017 at 7:23 AM, Tim Bain <tbain@alumni.duke.edu> wrote:
>
> > Andreas,
> >
> > I don't have enough experience with Artemis to be able to answer your
> > question, so I've been hoping that one of the Artemis folks on this list
> > will jump in to answer. Since that's not happening, you may want to
> start a
> > fresh message thread asking your question specifically in the context of
> > Artemis, in the hopes that people who might be ignoring this "5.x" thread
> > might see and respond to a new Artemis thread.
> >
> > Best,
> > Tim
> >
> > On Thu, Dec 7, 2017 at 9:37 AM, andi welchlin <andi.welchlin@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Hello Tim,
> > >
> > > thank you. Now I got the difference.
> > >
> > > As far as I understood the Artemis documentation it is possible to
> > > configure a cluster and also connect single satellite brokers to this
> > > cluster.
> > >
> > > The satellite brokers can be connected using a bi-directional bridge
> so I
> > > would use the core bridge and would use a network-connector where
> duplex
> > is
> > > set to true.
> > >
> > > Is this a way I could go?
> > >
> > > Kind Regards,
> > > Andreas
> > >
> > > On Wed, Dec 6, 2017 at 2:39 PM, Tim Bain <tbain@alumni.duke.edu>
> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Networks of brokers use store-and-forward to move messages between
> the
> > > > brokers, and each message is on only one broker at a time so it is
> lost
> > > (at
> > > > least temporarily) if that broker goes offline. It's not a cluster
> > under
> > > > the definition we just laid out.
> > > >
> > > > Tim
> > > >
> > > > On Dec 6, 2017 6:36 AM, "andi welchlin" <andi.welchlin@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Hello Tim,
> > > > >
> > > > > yes, that was exactly my definition.
> > > > >
> > > > > Maybe I misunderstood the documentation of ActiveMQ "network of
> > > brokers".
> > > > >
> > > > > Kind Regards,
> > > > > Andreas
> > > > >
> > > > > On Wed, Dec 6, 2017 at 2:33 PM, Tim Bain <tbain@alumni.duke.edu>
> > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > My definition of a cluster is that a given message is available
> > > > (without
> > > > > > forwarding) from all nodes in the cluster and will remain
> available
> > > > when
> > > > > a
> > > > > > single node in the cluster is lost. Master-slave pairs are
> clusters
> > > > (but
> > > > > > not active-active clusters) under that definition, while a
> network
> > of
> > > > > > brokers is not.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > So Andi, is that the definition you were using when you wrote
> this
> > > > > > question?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Tim
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Dec 6, 2017 5:35 AM, "Alec Henninger" <
> alechenninger@gmail.com>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Isn't network of brokers an active-active cluster?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Tue, Dec 5, 2017, 5:21 PM Tim Bain <tbain@alumni.duke.edu>
> > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Not with ActiveMQ 5.x, since it doesn't have a capacity
to do
> > an
> > > > > > > > active-active cluster, but ActiveMQ Artemis can. Have
you
> > looked
> > > at
> > > > > it?
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Tim
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On Dec 5, 2017 7:28 AM, "andi welchlin" <
> > andi.welchlin@gmail.com
> > > >
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Hello,
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > I would like to setup a active-active cluster
of brokers
> > using
> > > > > > > ActiveMq.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > But I also would like to connect single ActiveMq
satellite
> > > > brokers
> > > > > to
> > > > > > > > this
> > > > > > > > > cluster while they should share some queues and
exchanges.
> So
> > > > this
> > > > > > will
> > > > > > > > be
> > > > > > > > > pretty much like a federation between some satellite
> brokers
> > > and
> > > > a
> > > > > > > > central
> > > > > > > > > broker cluster. Clients will connect to these
satellite
> > brokers
> > > > > using
> > > > > > > > AMQP.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Do you think this would be possible using ActiveMq?
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Kind Regards,
> > > > > > > > > Andreas
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

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