Hi, Replying to my own message, the problem may be due to the following whenever I start a broker (or if a slave becomes a master):
INFO AMQPersistenceAdapter - Aquired lock for AMQ Store/shared/activemq INFO AMQPersistenceAdapter - AMQStore starting using directory: /shared/activemq/ INFO KahaStore - Kaha Store using data directory /shared/activemq/kr-store/state INFO AMQPersistenceAdapter - Active data files: [] WARN AMQPersistenceAdapter - The ReferenceStore is not valid - recovering ... INFO KahaStore - Kaha Store successfully deleted data directory /shared/activemq/kr-store/data INFO AMQPersistenceAdapter - Journal Recovery Started from: DataManager:(data-) INFO AMQPersistenceAdapter - Recovered 0 operations from redo log in 0.022 seconds. INFO AMQPersistenceAdapter - Finished recovering the ReferenceStore INFO KahaStore - Kaha Store using data directory /shared/activemq/kr-store/data Is it normal for the broker to delete the kr-store/data directory? Any ideas are most appreciated. Thanks, Ramit Ramit Arora wrote: > > Hi, > I am trying to get a Master/Slave topology to work. I tried pure > Master/Slave in 5.0.0, but I faced problems mentioned in the thread: > > http://www.nabble.com/Pure-Master-Slave---Out-of-sync-exceptions-td16296691s2354.html > > So, I thought I'll give shared file system Master/Slave a go. I understand > that it doesn't work on 5.0.0., so I downloaded the binary unix > installation of apache-activemq-5.1-20080325. > > It has the following problems: > 1. Durable subscribers donot get messages after failing over to the slave > broker. They failover successfully, but the slave's web console shows them > as OFFLINE. The subscribers keep running, waiting for messages but they > never get them. If I restart the subscribers, I get the following stack > trace: > > Caught: javax.jms.InvalidClientIDException: Broker: localhost - Client: a > already connected from /200.200.200.29:62970 > javax.jms.InvalidClientIDException: Broker: localhost - Client: a already > connected from /200.200.200.29:62970 > at > org.apache.activemq.broker.region.RegionBroker.addConnection(RegionBroker.java:211) > at > org.apache.activemq.broker.BrokerFilter.addConnection(BrokerFilter.java:81) > at > org.apache.activemq.advisory.AdvisoryBroker.addConnection(AdvisoryBroker.java:74) > at > org.apache.activemq.broker.BrokerFilter.addConnection(BrokerFilter.java:81) > at > org.apache.activemq.broker.MutableBrokerFilter.addConnection(MutableBrokerFilter.java:88) > at > org.apache.activemq.broker.TransportConnection.processAddConnection(TransportConnection.java:663) > at > org.apache.activemq.broker.jmx.ManagedTransportConnection.processAddConnection(ManagedTransportConnection.java:86) > at > org.apache.activemq.command.ConnectionInfo.visit(ConnectionInfo.java:125) > at > org.apache.activemq.broker.TransportConnection.service(TransportConnection.java:293) > at > org.apache.activemq.broker.TransportConnection$1.onCommand(TransportConnection.java:181) > at > org.apache.activemq.transport.TransportFilter.onCommand(TransportFilter.java:68) > at > org.apache.activemq.transport.WireFormatNegotiator.onCommand(WireFormatNegotiator.java:141) > at > org.apache.activemq.transport.InactivityMonitor.onCommand(InactivityMonitor.java:206) > at > org.apache.activemq.transport.TransportSupport.doConsume(TransportSupport.java:84) > at > org.apache.activemq.transport.tcp.TcpTransport.doRun(TcpTransport.java:196) > at > org.apache.activemq.transport.tcp.TcpTransport.run(TcpTransport.java:183) > at java.lang.Thread.run(Thread.java:619) > > 2. Non-durable subscribers do failover & receive messages. However, if I > have a slow subscriber, it misses messages on failover. Eg. When the > master dies, if 100 messages were published & only 30 were received by the > subscriber, the remaining 70 messages are lost. The subscriber starts > receiving from 101. > > The absence of a stable master/slave topology is becoming a real problem > for us. Somebody please advise us what needs to be done. > > Thanks, > Ramit > > -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Shared-Filesystem-Master-Slave-doesn%27t-work-even-on-5.1-SNAPSHOT-tp16315761s2354p16323984.html Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
