FWIW some folks might not want a broker to process any messages if it can't be sure that messages are being replicated to another data centre. i.e. having a single broker own messages might be a concern. Its kinda like having the failover option; where if a master dies, the slave also can shut down too (as having 2 copies of each message in 2 data centres at all times might be a requirement).
2008/8/18 AD <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > It doesnt seem that this comment from the site is in the context of a > failover, only that if a master cant contact a slave, it wont process > messages. In a cluster setup this seems quite bizarre that the system would > stop responding if the passive node was down. > > On Fri, Aug 15, 2008 at 8:04 AM, Hiram Chirino <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote: > >> Yes that is exactly right. The master cannot take over from the slave. >> >> On Wed, Aug 6, 2008 at 2:21 AM, qlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> > >> > I have the same question on it. When I kills slave broker, I have found >> that >> > the master broker is down as well. >> > AMQ developer, would you please explain it for us. Thanks a lot. >> > >> > -- >> > View this message in context: >> http://www.nabble.com/pure-master-slave-tp18831368p18845063.html >> > Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. >> > >> > >> >> >> >> -- >> Regards, >> Hiram >> >> Blog: http://hiramchirino.com >> >> Open Source SOA >> http://open.iona.com >> > -- James ------- http://macstrac.blogspot.com/ Open Source Integration http://open.iona.com
