[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       activemq-users
Subject:    Re: Shared Filesystem Master/Slave doesn't work even on 5.1
From:       Ramit Arora <ramit.arora () gmail ! com>
Date:       2008-03-27 13:48:59
Message-ID: 16323984.post () talk ! nabble ! com
[Download RAW message or body]


Hi,
Replying to my own message, the problem may be due to the following whenever
I start a broker (or if a slave becomes a master):

INFO  AMQPersistenceAdapter          - Aquired lock for AMQ
Store/shared/activemq
INFO  AMQPersistenceAdapter          - AMQStore starting using directory:
/shared/activemq/
INFO  KahaStore                      - Kaha Store using data directory
/shared/activemq/kr-store/state
INFO  AMQPersistenceAdapter          - Active data files: []
WARN  AMQPersistenceAdapter          - The ReferenceStore is not valid -
recovering ...
INFO  KahaStore                      - Kaha Store successfully deleted data
directory /shared/activemq/kr-store/data
INFO  AMQPersistenceAdapter          - Journal Recovery Started from:
DataManager:(data-)
INFO  AMQPersistenceAdapter          - Recovered 0 operations from redo log
in 0.022 seconds.
INFO  AMQPersistenceAdapter          - Finished recovering the
ReferenceStore
INFO  KahaStore                      - Kaha Store using data directory
/shared/activemq/kr-store/data

Is it normal for the broker to delete the kr-store/data directory? Any ideas
are most appreciated.

Thanks,
Ramit


Ramit Arora wrote:
> 
> Hi,
> I am trying to get a Master/Slave topology to work. I tried pure
> Master/Slave in 5.0.0, but I faced problems mentioned in the thread:
> 
> http://www.nabble.com/Pure-Master-Slave---Out-of-sync-exceptions-td16296691s2354.html
>  
> So, I thought I'll give shared file system Master/Slave a go. I understand
> that it doesn't work on 5.0.0., so I downloaded the binary unix
> installation of apache-activemq-5.1-20080325.
> 
> It has the following problems:
> 1. Durable subscribers donot get messages after failing over to the slave
> broker. They failover successfully, but the slave's web console shows them
> as OFFLINE. The subscribers keep running, waiting for messages but they
> never get them. If I restart the subscribers, I get the following stack
> trace:
> 
> Caught: javax.jms.InvalidClientIDException: Broker: localhost - Client: a
> already connected from /200.200.200.29:62970
> javax.jms.InvalidClientIDException: Broker: localhost - Client: a already
> connected from /200.200.200.29:62970
> at
> org.apache.activemq.broker.region.RegionBroker.addConnection(RegionBroker.java:211)
> at
> org.apache.activemq.broker.BrokerFilter.addConnection(BrokerFilter.java:81)
> at
> org.apache.activemq.advisory.AdvisoryBroker.addConnection(AdvisoryBroker.java:74)
> at
> org.apache.activemq.broker.BrokerFilter.addConnection(BrokerFilter.java:81)
> at
> org.apache.activemq.broker.MutableBrokerFilter.addConnection(MutableBrokerFilter.java:88)
>  at
> org.apache.activemq.broker.TransportConnection.processAddConnection(TransportConnection.java:663)
>  at
> org.apache.activemq.broker.jmx.ManagedTransportConnection.processAddConnection(ManagedTransportConnection.java:86)
>  at
> org.apache.activemq.command.ConnectionInfo.visit(ConnectionInfo.java:125)
> at
> org.apache.activemq.broker.TransportConnection.service(TransportConnection.java:293)
>  at
> org.apache.activemq.broker.TransportConnection$1.onCommand(TransportConnection.java:181)
>  at
> org.apache.activemq.transport.TransportFilter.onCommand(TransportFilter.java:68)
> at
> org.apache.activemq.transport.WireFormatNegotiator.onCommand(WireFormatNegotiator.java:141)
>  at
> org.apache.activemq.transport.InactivityMonitor.onCommand(InactivityMonitor.java:206)
>  at
> org.apache.activemq.transport.TransportSupport.doConsume(TransportSupport.java:84)
> at
> org.apache.activemq.transport.tcp.TcpTransport.doRun(TcpTransport.java:196)
> at
> org.apache.activemq.transport.tcp.TcpTransport.run(TcpTransport.java:183)
> at java.lang.Thread.run(Thread.java:619)
> 
> 2. Non-durable subscribers do failover & receive messages. However, if I
> have a slow subscriber, it misses messages on failover. Eg. When the
> master dies, if 100 messages were published & only 30 were received by the
> subscriber, the remaining 70 messages are lost. The subscriber starts
> receiving from 101.
> 
> The absence of a stable master/slave topology is becoming a real problem
> for us. Somebody please advise us what needs to be done.
> 
> Thanks,
> Ramit
> 
> 

-- 
View this message in context: \
http://www.nabble.com/Shared-Filesystem-Master-Slave-doesn%27t-work-even-on-5.1-SNAPSHOT-tp16315761s2354p16323984.html
 Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.


[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]