Hi, I am facing a problem setting up shared file system master slave on the latest 5.1 snapshot. The problems are mentioned in this thread http://www.nabble.com/Shared-Filesystem-Master-Slave-doesn%27t-work-even-on-5.1-SNAPSHOT-td16315761s2354.html
Is master/slave working fine for you? Would you mind sharing your broker configs with me? Setting the same name for the two brokers does not seem to help in my case. Thanks, Ramit Mike Miljour wrote: > > After further investigation, it turns out there was a configuration issue, > which could have been avoided with clearer documentation. (it might have > helped if i had included my configuration as well!) We had set the value > for broker name differently in our two running instances of ActiveMQ. > Doing this caused the ActiveMQs to act as though they were load balancing > instead of acting as Master and slave (which was our intent). > > Suggested documentation changes:In the schema reference for brokerName, > change the description from: Sets the name of this broker; which must be > unique in the network > to: > Sets the name of this broker; which must be unique in the network, except > for master-slave configurations, where it must be the same > > Also, in the master slave shared file system documentation, include a note > stating that the WebConsole will not load for the slave until it becomes > the master if the setup is done correctly. Also mention that the value > for brokerName must be the same for the master and all slaves. > > We are not sure why we would sometimes have 3 consumers in one queue in > one instance of AMQ and one in the same queue of the other instance of AMQ > (there should have been 2 in each). With the correct master-slave setup > now, we no longer have a problem. > > Mike M > > -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Consumers-not-always-being-released-tp15818936s2354p16318588.html Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
