It also probably wouldn't be that hard for you to implement a
Zookeeper-based Locker if that sounded more appealing than a SQL database,
since it sounds like you might feel negatively about using an RDBMS.
If you do, we'd love have you donate it back to the community if your
company would allow it
Using JDBC you can get both.
> On Oct 31, 2017, at 4:06 PM, akhil wrote:
>
> Hello Everyone ,
>
> I just had an issue today with the Active MQ
Hello Everyone ,
I just had an issue today with the Active MQ EFS where one of the master
lost its mount and two brokers acted as a master master instead of complete
failover. I have just looked at the pluggable storage lockers but it was all
giving that locks to JDBC stores not the EFS ones . Is
I'm working on a similar setup right now can you share your activemq.xml
database config? specificly what class did you use?
I tried the one below but keep getting errors that the class can't be found.
The issue has been reopened and will be fixed when someone gets time. This
would be a relatively easy fix to implement if anyone wants to attempt a
pull request to get it fixed faster. Version 5.14.1 is being voted on now
but this fix could go into 5.14.2 and 5.15.0.
On Tue, Sep 27, 2016 at 8:50
This issue got closed by Chris Shannon, but I think it would be easy enough
to add a flag that tells the broker to bypass the total space check that's
causing problems, so I think we should reopen it.
Tim
On Fri, Sep 23, 2016 at 11:42 AM, wcrowell
wrote:
> Please take a look at the comment I ma
Please take a look at the comment I made on:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AMQ-6441
I may know what the issue is. The particular client I am working with is
running JDK 7.
--
View this message in context:
http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/Active-MQ-Shared-File-System-Master-Slave-
Thanks for following up on this to make sure that one got created.
On Sep 23, 2016 9:34 AM, "wcrowell" wrote:
> Thank you!!! I was going to create one if it had not been done already.
>
>
>
> --
> View this message in context: http://activemq.2283324.n4.
> nabble.com/Active-MQ-Shared-File-Syste
Did a JIRA issue get created on this?
--
View this message in context:
http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/Active-MQ-Shared-File-System-Master-Slave-with-Elastic-File-System-tp4715818p4716847.html
Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Thank you!!! I was going to create one if it had not been done already.
--
View this message in context:
http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/Active-MQ-Shared-File-System-Master-Slave-with-Elastic-File-System-tp4715818p4716853.html
Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailing list archive at Nabble.
Done: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AMQ-6441
If anyone wants to update the ticket, feel free.
--
View this message in context:
http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/Active-MQ-Shared-File-System-Master-Slave-with-Elastic-File-System-tp4715818p4716851.html
Sent from the ActiveMQ - User m
No not yet, but I will do so now.
--
View this message in context:
http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/Active-MQ-Shared-File-System-Master-Slave-with-Elastic-File-System-tp4715818p4716848.html
Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
I hadn't heard of anyone using EFS before you asked about it. That's not
to say that no one has, just that I've got less idea than you do about what
if any pitfalls you might find along the way.
On Sep 21, 2016 10:33 AM, "khokhani" wrote:
> Thanks Tim! Thanks Justin! for insight on this topic.
Thanks Tim! Thanks Justin! for insight on this topic.
I have setup Amazon EFS as LevelDB persistence store and MySql based locker.
All functional and failover testing are positive and message are available
and delivered without any failure or loss while switching from master to
slave as well as r
Nice article. One suggestion: you should link to the relevant wiki page (
http://activemq.apache.org/pluggable-storage-lockers.html) for anyone who
wants more information.
On Sep 8, 2016 11:34 PM, "Justin Reock" wrote:
Thanks Tim! I recently posted a blog article on this subject, if the user
co
Thanks Tim! I recently posted a blog article on this subject, if the user
community would like some details about the pluggable storage locker
implementation:
http://blog.klocwork.com/open-source/pluggable-storage-lockers-for-activemq/
I hope it’s helpful.
-Justin
On 9/2/16, 11:53 PM, "tbai
It rules out using EFS for your locker implementation, but as Justin said,
pluggable lockers would allow you to put your data into an EFS but use
another mechanism for locking to determine ownership. But obviously there
would need to be a fix to the code that figures out whether there's enough
spa
The issue is perhaps that EFS supports NFS4 but with the following
limitations:
http://docs.aws.amazon.com/efs/latest/ug/nfs4-unsupported-features.html
In particular: "All locks in Amazon EFS are advisory, which means that READ
and WRITE operations do not check for conflicting locks before the op
Be careful of this, in my own load testing the lock state can be lost over EFS
leading to a “master-master” scenario under heavy load, which can lead to
journal corruption. Check out the lease locking pluggable storage locker,
which is a viable workaround for this problem.
Thanks,
Justin
On
I think all EFS volumes are that size. It's a play-by-usage model - it did
strike me as risky, a runaway process could cost you a lot of money!
On 2 Sep 2016 4:19 p.m., "Tim Bain" wrote:
Was your EFS as large as the one the OP described? The perceived problem
was that the code couldn't handle a
Tim,
I contacted AWS tech support and their response was this:
"I've checked with our EFS team to see if there is any EFS-related
workaround they can offer. Unfortunately, they have confirmed that this is
EFS intended behavior and there is no way of mounting a filesystem with
"predetermined size"
Was your EFS as large as the one the OP described? The perceived problem
was that the code couldn't handle a volume that size, not that it couldn't
handle an EFS volume.
On Sep 2, 2016 5:17 AM, "Korny Sietsma" wrote:
> Interesting - we set up ActiveMQ 5.9 successfully on EFS, I'm guessing
> the
Interesting - we set up ActiveMQ 5.9 successfully on EFS, I'm guessing
these error messages relate to checks made in later versions of the product.
Note that we gave up on this approach - we found that shared filesystem
master/slave had several problems for us when we tested it with network lag
an
Thanks Tim. I'll get this up on JIRA soon.
--
View this message in context:
http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/Active-MQ-Shared-File-System-Master-Slave-with-Elastic-File-System-tp4715818p4715867.html
Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
I'd guess that the way ActiveMQ is "working" is that your persistent
messages, which should have been stored in the persistence store, are
instead being stored in the memory store. This means they will not survive
a broker restart/failover even though they should, and you'll be subject to
the memo
25 matches
Mail list logo