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

List:       activemq-users
Subject:    Re: ActiveMQ database lock problem
From:       mickhayes <mickhayes () gmail ! com>
Date:       2012-05-30 10:09:56
Message-ID: 1338372596495-4652829.post () n4 ! nabble ! com
[Download RAW message or body]

Looks interesting... you might get a response if you comment on his blog
entry directly.

However, I think http://activemq.apache.org/jdbc-master-slave.html is worth
a look anyway:

"Clients should be using the Failover Transport to connect to the available
brokers. e.g. using a URL something like the following
failover:(tcp://broker1:61616,tcp://broker2:61616,tcp://broker3:61616)"

In the above case, the brokers are (most likely) on different machines - at
least that would be the intention when different machine names are given in
a example.

Your brokers are, however, on the same machine, so why not a different port
per broker instance?

Unless you have a very good reason to use the same port for each broker's
transport, I think you should use different ports.





-----
Michael Hayes B.Sc. (NUI), M.Sc. (DCU), SCSA SCNA 

--
View this message in context: \
http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/ActiveMQ-database-lock-problem-tp4652786p4652829.html
 Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.


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