There a lots of configuration options that can help here. You can configure the jdbc statements that are used for locking, see: https://issues.apache.org/activemq/browse/AMQ-2520?focusedCommentId=59152&page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels%3Acomment-tabpanel#action_59152or provide your own lock implementation to override the default or provide a separate lock datasource so that it can reside in a different database.
There is currently no lock implementation that uses the file system but that would be a nice enhancement. We would love the contribution or open an enhancement for this. On 28 April 2010 18:39, KRISHNAS <krishna_see...@hotmail.com> wrote: > > We are planning to use "Clustering - JDBC Master Slave" approach for > Failover > and using the Shared DB by multiple brokers .... > > When the Master Broker is started, it puts a lock on the lock table. When > the Slave Broker started it keeps check the lock (whether the lock was > released by Master or not) against the lock table. This approach works fine > but on DB2, checking the lock against Locked Table throws the warning > alert(Kind of Error), which the DB2 admins against it. > > So, is there any way to use the File System for locking purpose and use the > DB2 for Message Persistency only ? > > We looked at the Journal + JDBC, which might solve our problem. But we > don't > want to use the High performance Journal (As we want to store all the > messages to the permanent DB). > Any suggestions would be great. > > Thank you. > Krishna. > -- > View this message in context: > http://old.nabble.com/How-to-use-the-File-System-for-locking-purpose-and-use-the-DB-for-Message-Persistency-only--tp28391833p28391833.html > Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > > -- http://blog.garytully.com Open Source Integration http://fusesource.com
