Tim,
I understand your point of view completely. I have a customer that runs Oracle.
When they have moderate traffic they experience a failover event between the
Master/Slave. And it appears to come from an inability to access the lock in
time causing the slave to take over. When they first came to us, we wondered
why they wanted to do this as well.
Vince
On 7/12/21, 7:56 AM, "Tim Bain" <tb...@alumni.duke.edu> wrote:
To confirm, are you saying that you're trying to use one Oracle database
for message storage and a different Oracle database for locking?
If so, would you mind explaining why you're not just using a single
database for both purposes? I have no idea if the configuration I think
you're describing is possible in the current implementation, but I could
imagine someone saying that there was no need to support it because no one
would ever use it since they'd never want multiple SQL databases vs. using
a single database for both purposes, and I'd like to understand why that
assumption is a bad one.
Tim
On Sun, Jul 11, 2021, 7:23 PM Vince Cox <v...@perforce.com> wrote:
> Using ActiveMQ 5.15.x & 5.16.x I have been unable to get both the locking
> mechanism and the data on 2 unique data sources (using oracle)? Having
> failover issues if they share the connection pool and data source. Is
> anyone aware of how to do this? Is this something ActiveMQ should be able
> to do?
>
> Thank you.
>
> Vince
>
>
> This e-mail may contain information that is privileged or confidential. If
> you are not the intended recipient, please delete the e-mail and any
> attachments and notify us immediately.
>
>
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not
click on links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the
content is safe.
This e-mail may contain information that is privileged or confidential. If you
are not the intended recipient, please delete the e-mail and any attachments
and notify us immediately.
