the lease database locker may help, if you configure the slave lease to be small relative to the master, then the master will take over from the slave.
https://access.redhat.com/site/documentation/en-US/Fuse_MQ_Enterprise/7.1/html/Configuring_Broker_Persistence/files/MQLeaseDatabaseLocker.html On 2 July 2013 23:36, hbakkum <hayden.bak...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi, > > I have set up ActiveMQ in a JDBC MasterSlave configuration. I have a use > case where it would be useful to mark a broker as the "Master" broker which > would always take a lock if it was owned by a slave. Is there anyway of > doing this or something similar, e.g. some sort of order of precedence when > brokers compete for the lock? > > I would be able to achieve this perhaps by restarting the slaves when the > "Master" is available but does not hold the lock, however it would be much > cleaner if I could just configure a master broker which always takes the > lock. > > Any help would be most appreciated. > > Thanks, > Hayden. > > > > -- > View this message in context: > http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/Setting-a-Master-broker-in-a-MasterSlave-configuration-tp4668815.html > Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. -- http://redhat.com http://blog.garytully.com
