[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AMQ-4365?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13870028#comment-13870028
]
Paul Gale commented on AMQ-4365:
--------------------------------
With this change in place does the broker handle the two scenarios where the
database is either offline at start-up or goes offline at at some point after
start-up? If so, how?
If not, what modifications are needed for the broker to cope with these
scenarios? I am trying to get an idea for the nature and magnitude of any
required changes. Ideally the broker should attempt to (re)connect indefinitely
in both scenarios.
> Allow the Lease Locker to be used with out a JDBCPersistenceAdapter - so it
> can be a kahadb lock
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: AMQ-4365
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AMQ-4365
> Project: ActiveMQ
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Affects Versions: 5.8.0
> Reporter: Gary Tully
> Assignee: Gary Tully
> Fix For: 5.9.0
>
>
> The locker interface needs another configure option to provide a broker
> service, or needs to be brokerService aware so that a locker can get identity
> and access to the io exception handlers.
> The lease database locker is dependent on the jdbc pa to get statements and
> data source. It should be possible to configure these independently such that
> it can be used standalone as a broker lock. So setters for each.
> This will help sort out some of the dependencies between broker and lock
> implementations. also making it possible to use a lease lock with kahadb for
> example.
> some context:
> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/activemq-users/201303.mbox/%3ccaj5znhuruz+aewsaabajtwbbpkwn06ryyyt6nqsdg_su7vm...@mail.gmail.com%3E
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.1.5#6160)
