Hi,
I'v known the problem. Thank you.
2010-10-27
renyong
发件人： renyong
发送时间： 2010-10-27 10:10:00
收件人： users
抄送：
主题： Problem retrieving message for browse
Hi, I'm using the activemq 5.3.1, and meet a problem, I couldn't resolve it.
The log:
2010-10-27 09:04:29.218 [Queue.java:871] - Proble
Hi,
For HA, we are planning to use JDBC Master Slave approach. We understand
that the DB Lock controls the Master and Slave.
But can we use High Performance Journal also with this JDBC Master Slave
approach for HA?
Is it supported ? If so, Should each Broker use its own local Journal
(data di
It might be worth looking at at least testing out drdb.
On Oct 26, 2010, at 2:12 PM, kseelam wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> We are also looking at HA with JDBC persistence with Journal. How did you
> achieve this?
>
> Thanks
> Krish.
>
> --
> View this message in context:
> http://activemq.2283324.n4
Hi,
We are also looking at HA with JDBC persistence with Journal. How did you
achieve this?
Thanks
Krish.
--
View this message in context:
http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/Recover-a-failed-Broker-s-Journal-by-Database-of-Another-Broker-tp2351497p3014437.html
Sent from the ActiveMQ - Use
On 10/26/2010 4:24 AM, Gary Tully wrote:
That looks like a bug in the peer transport factory. I uses
localhost:0 as the tcp transport url, but localhost maps to the
loopback address since 5.3[1] so the connection is refused.
The peer transport factory should use the wildcard address, 0.0.0.0
Fo
Certainly. ActiveMQ could support that. You would probably want to
use Apache Camel for aggregation and custom processors for GPS.
On Mon, Oct 25, 2010 at 11:40 AM, doby wrote:
>
> I'm considering using ActiveMQ for a broadcast sporting event. The idea is
> that contestants carrying a GPS and
Jira case created as https://issues.apache.org/activemq/browse/AMQ-2999
--
View this message in context:
http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/Problem-with-simple-peer-configuration-my-config-or-AMQ-issue-tp3013268p3013457.html
Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
That looks like a bug in the peer transport factory. I uses
localhost:0 as the tcp transport url, but localhost maps to the
loopback address since 5.3[1] so the connection is refused.
The peer transport factory should use the wildcard address, 0.0.0.0
Can you raise a jira issue for this? It is an
kfchu wrote:
>
> I try to use ActiveMQ5.4.1 to implement a failback plan:
>
> Broker A is primary and Broker B is the backup, if A down then turn to B,
> but if A is back to live then the flow will go back to A from B.
>
I set up a master/slave topology with JDBC:
http://activemq.apache.org/
have a read through http://activemq.apache.org/persistence.html
that shows how a persistence store is configured and some of the
different options available. Think it will answer all your questions.
On 26 October 2010 09:37, carlo.bonamico wrote:
>
> Thanks for you answer! But then what I am not
Thanks for you answer! But then what I am not sure of is:
-is kahaPersistenceAdapter the same as using AMQ Message Store?
-does choosing a kahaPersistenceAdapter changes things with respect to using
KahaDB in the configuration?
--
View this message in context:
http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabbl
KahaDB is a new implementation, the latest incarnation. KahaDB uses
less file file descriptors and provides faster recovery than its
predecessor, the AMQ message store.
On 25 October 2010 16:45, carlo.bonamico wrote:
>
> I have seen various configurations in both the ActiveMQ website and mailing
I'm trying to get simple peer-configuration to work and keep failing. I have
one two PC's and I want to run a message producer on PC1 and a consumer on
PC2. I've tried this with verious AMQ versions from 5.3.0 to 5.5.0-Snapshot
but nothing seems to work. I'm quite new to AMQ so not sure if the iss
13 matches
Mail list logo
