Tim, Thanks for the detailed reply. I will share with our app design/development team for more in-depth discussion and post back with status on any workarounds or coding we come up with.
Also, may consider entering a feature request as you suggested. Agree it may be a bigger update than team wants to tackle but if nothing else it may stir some more discussion and brainstorming. I've got to believe someone somewhere has had the same architecture with similar problem as follows: Oracle RAC, Active MQ slave/master - take down one node of the RAC (for maintenance or unexpected problem) and Active MQ survives on the remaining node. Just to clarify, I believe the slave broker didn't acquire the lock because it appears both master and slave were still pointed to the Oracle RAC node that was taken down for maintenance (node 2 was left up and we expected Active MQ to connect to the DB though that node. We’re using an Oracle SCAN Listener - Single Client Access Name). After we did maintenance, and rebooted node 1 of the RAC, the Active MQ was back and live (on that node). So... may be able to do some scripting and redirecting from the Oracle side when a RAC nodes goes down... we'll see. Again, thanks. You or anyone else with more suggestions or experiences to share, be glad to hear and keep the thread alive. Thanks, -- bsm...@skylinenet.net -- View this message in context: http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/Can-ActiveMQ-take-advantage-of-Oracle-transparent-application-failover-tp3526485p4725240.html Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
