From users-return-18196-archive-asf-public=cust-asf.ponee.io@qpid.apache.org Wed Jan 24 10:37:30 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: archive-asf-public@eu.ponee.io Delivered-To: archive-asf-public@eu.ponee.io Received: from cust-asf.ponee.io (cust-asf.ponee.io [163.172.22.183]) by mx-eu-01.ponee.io (Postfix) with ESMTP id 82869180630 for ; Wed, 24 Jan 2018 10:37:30 +0100 (CET) Received: by cust-asf.ponee.io (Postfix) id 73032160C3C; Wed, 24 Jan 2018 09:37:30 +0000 (UTC) Delivered-To: archive-asf-public@cust-asf.ponee.io Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by cust-asf.ponee.io (Postfix) with SMTP id 92E02160C2E for ; Wed, 24 Jan 2018 10:37:29 +0100 (CET) Received: (qmail 46330 invoked by uid 500); 24 Jan 2018 09:37:28 -0000 Mailing-List: contact users-help@qpid.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: users@qpid.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list users@qpid.apache.org Received: (qmail 46318 invoked by uid 99); 24 Jan 2018 09:37:27 -0000 Received: from pnap-us-west-generic-nat.apache.org (HELO spamd3-us-west.apache.org) (209.188.14.142) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 24 Jan 2018 09:37:27 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by spamd3-us-west.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at spamd3-us-west.apache.org) with ESMTP id 5ED19180701 for ; Wed, 24 Jan 2018 09:37:27 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at spamd3-us-west.apache.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 1.192 X-Spam-Level: * X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.192 tagged_above=-999 required=6.31 tests=[DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URI_HEX=1.313] autolearn=disabled Authentication-Results: spamd3-us-west.apache.org (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mx1-lw-eu.apache.org ([10.40.0.8]) by localhost (spamd3-us-west.apache.org [10.40.0.10]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 1YLzvOjsbF3T for ; Wed, 24 Jan 2018 09:37:25 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-wm0-f46.google.com (mail-wm0-f46.google.com [74.125.82.46]) by mx1-lw-eu.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at mx1-lw-eu.apache.org) with ESMTPS id 51A7C5F24B for ; Wed, 24 Jan 2018 09:37:25 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-wm0-f46.google.com with SMTP id v71so7241491wmv.2 for ; Wed, 24 Jan 2018 01:37:25 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:reply-to:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id :subject:to; bh=PDQk1Q+Y+/9/1OiRzq0ghgikYmP8d6DfSOajVZ3YldA=; b=C6sZFyeyC6YAYIuCLlYiEPj9xcL4ZhOs5VMTshFtbixnMUxzXszHHQ0BfmDzeo1T+m bdsJPtcg5v8FSTMBnUZkV30tzNR9/0XcVQIxAo4SGY33T9Xs0PYp625cSAiDOx/2+wFp RXAM2gXRa5TxsalJ3XwZ5NQ8tnsuH0dBCW04nKp6lZ/nsCp0VQpc1eF1bk9L66uG/fZY B5F+EjZhdECFzfklrx9yWPf0z4aMbn+cwKRnIVgh5LH1Ek5uBW4D/VMNJPHwvYBHs70r q/+qlLaPgybG5CMFs/0os3wWnQnWzxZ4TrpNCzcVV8+hc+nimRa93bt9FtCnigO9GwI8 gKCA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:reply-to:in-reply-to:references :from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=PDQk1Q+Y+/9/1OiRzq0ghgikYmP8d6DfSOajVZ3YldA=; b=Ln7RAO1rridreXbWzywqWrJwUon7zw5kfSPh0LCji6AUPxnvrgAQX2XwBb9ErL1KMc 3GGcYR+3sVpUFyxHvPoueufxuJIaDIttCaeg2KBSZbpAkHLj1hP9HdGt8Y8GbGMwiFKi H3NjVyB1NUtkDVKOode8oEvaIndQ/5zxHqO/2Xh2vGL4bCiULQBp1rNHjIF6bIXSylhK fqffITzc6UN9YlRGGlMOhkNX9XY6swPPpmhh9EktYv+Fs9oKWb/bs48/LM+g9j4P4Prj A/FhRabbJ3ZSFiP+VtDFyFV/ND+eSUnZ1jXnIgfKwEzYtxJCzk2GgrwYSOVeZJj/AWS3 yG8w== X-Gm-Message-State: AKwxyte64fmC13Q48X8rohn8o04sactQfx4PQVm3/jIF+VKP9E7QifyK psR+pE/pcVV23OkrigXdvv9lWJ8jCUlSsIAVrjxoG0p1 X-Google-Smtp-Source: AH8x224dKARiM9Wg4pP0ejhshEMaU5O023Nm610XI5qBdQAxXyoyxlrUOYrsw0WEL8mSQhonX4+9GzaguqOsAG83owg= X-Received: by 10.28.166.195 with SMTP id p186mr4000944wme.81.1516786639029; Wed, 24 Jan 2018 01:37:19 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.223.136.229 with HTTP; Wed, 24 Jan 2018 01:37:18 -0800 (PST) Reply-To: keith.wall@gmail.com In-Reply-To: <1516739001917-0.post@n2.nabble.com> References: <1516739001917-0.post@n2.nabble.com> From: Keith W Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2018 09:37:18 +0000 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Broker-J HA with just 2 brokers To: users@qpid.apache.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Hello Bryan Broker-J does support a active/passive groups formed of two nodes. In a two node group, both nodes to be online in order to maintain quorum. If one node were to fail business will stop. In order to restore service from a single node, a 3rd party (script and/or human) needs to intervene and set "Allow to Operate Solo" on the surviving node. This overrides the normal quorum requirement and allows service continue from the one. It is important to manage the setting of "Allow to Operate Solo" carefully. If you were to set it on both nodes and the network link between the two nodes be lost both nodes would become master and process transactions independently (i.e.a split brain). Read more here: https://qpid.apache.org/releases/qpid-broker-j-7.0.0/book/Java-Broker-High-Availability-OverviewOfHA.html https://qpid.apache.org/releases/qpid-broker-j-7.0.0/book/Java-Broker-High-Availability-Behaviour.html "Required Minimum Number Of Nodes" actually applies to groups of three or more. It has no effect on a two node group (and is hidden from the UI when two node group is configured). It is used to reduce the quorum requirement in groups of three or more allows service to be restored in extraordinary failure scenarios. Obviously the same care needs to be taken with this setting to avoid the possibility of split-brain. Whilst it is technically possible to host a group of three nodes across two JVMs, you defeat the purpose of a three node group - the ability to recover -automatically- from a single node failure. Hope this helps. Keith On 23 January 2018 at 20:23, bryand wrote: > I'm just getting started with QPid and want to setup HA with Broker-J. We > are trying to replace our current ActiveMQ environment where we use a Master > Slave approach for HA and just have 2 nodes running. I really want to just > have 2 nodes with Broker-J also because that setup has been working fine for > us with ActiveMQ and I really don't want to have 3 VMs used for both our > Test and Production Broker-J environments. > > I've read the documentation regarding Required Minimum Number Of Nodes and > Allow to Operate Solo and it sounds as if those options are really meant for > manual use in a 2 node HA environment (for example you shouldn't have Allow > to Operate Solo enabled for more than one node at a time). > > Is it possible to have a 3 node environment just using 2 brokers (so I can > just have 2 VMs for each of our Test and Production environments)? For > example can I have one VirtualHostNode on Broker A and then 2 > VirtualHostNodes on Broker B. I've set this up but am not having much luck > getting either node on Broker B accept requests from a client (when I stop > the node on Broker A) even though the Virtual Host is reporting as ACTIVE on > Broker B - the client is reporting that the Virtual Host is unknown. > However as soon as I start the Virtual Host Node on Broker A, I can > successfully have my (JMS) client connect to the MASTER Virtual Host Node on > Broker B. > > Anyway I'm wondering if the setup I'm trying (2 VMs with 1 Broker running on > each but 1 of the brokers has 2 VirtualHostNodes for the VirtualHost) is > even valid or do I really need to have 3 VMs with 1 Broker each running? > Just trying to see if I can keep the same 2 VM setup we have for ActiveMQ. > > > > -- > Sent from: http://qpid.2158936.n2.nabble.com/Apache-Qpid-users-f2158936.html > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@qpid.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@qpid.apache.org > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@qpid.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@qpid.apache.org