Why are you using 3 VMs in the first place? Is that what you were using before with the 5.x broker? If so, you may need to reassess your architecture since Artemis' performance is significantly better for many use-cases. You may not need so many brokers. Have you conducted any performance tests?
Even if you do set up HA you'll still need to account for the situation were the backup fails (as you mentioned) and you need to tear down the connection and create a new one. What specifically about your solution do you not think is robust? Justin On Thu, Mar 14, 2019 at 1:06 PM artemisn00b <[email protected]> wrote: > Hmm..so I have a question. Would you recommend me using a backup at all for > the scenario below - > > I have 3 VMs as Artemis servers and I want all messages to be delivered to > all consumers on the servers. I'm currently using a cluster (ip1,ip2,ip3) > and I tear-down and create a new connection on a broker failure. So, it > connects to a server that is up and running. It seems to be working fine, > except I don't think it's a robust solution. > > Can you suggest a better implementation for the above scenario? Would you > say I should use a backup? I'm trying without one, as it needs extra memory > and in case the master fails, and the connection failed over to a slave, > and > that slave also fails, I anyway have to tear down that connection and > create > a new one. > > Thanks for all the help. Reallllyyyy appreciate it! :) > > > > -- > Sent from: > http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/ActiveMQ-User-f2341805.html >
