ables necessary to prevent a failover
>> ActiveMQ server from taking over.
>>
>> If anyone else as any ideas/thoughts/solutions I would appreciate it.
>> Thanks.
>>
>> --adam
>> --
>> View this message in context:
>> http://old.nabble.com/Running-Acti
27;m willing to bet that the problem here is that ActiveMQ uses an open
> transaction to "lock" the table or tables necessary to prevent a failover
> ActiveMQ server from taking over.
>
> If anyone else as any ideas/thoughts/solutions I would appreciate it.
> Thanks.
>
e table or tables necessary to prevent a failover
ActiveMQ server from taking over.
If anyone else as any ideas/thoughts/solutions I would appreciate it.
Thanks.
--adam
--
View this message in context:
http://old.nabble.com/Running-ActiveMQ-and-having-a-database-failover-tp28233397p28244251.ht
such that ActiveMQ can recover without
> user intervention? We are currently using ActiveMQ 5.1.
>
> Thanks,
>
> --adam
> --
> View this message in context:
> http://old.nabble.com/Running-ActiveMQ-and-having-a-database-failover-tp28233397p28233397.html
> Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
>
--
Sebastien Rodriguez
ve a solution whereby we can use primary/failover database
servers in conjunction with ActiveMQ such that ActiveMQ can recover without
user intervention? We are currently using ActiveMQ 5.1.
Thanks,
--adam
--
View this message in context:
http://old.nabble.com/Running-ActiveMQ-and-having-a-databas
