> I guess what I would really want is to have 2 live servers sharing the same > storage on the filesystem and if my load balancer tries a server that is > killed for some reason it then sends the same requests to the other server > and it works transparently, but I recognise that is not the Artemis > architecture.
Fair enough, but there are a lot of instances where this would break since JMS connections are stateful unlike, for example, HTTP connections which are stateless. You can't simply flop requests back and forth or send requests meant for one broker to the other in the case where the original failed, at least not unless you've configured the broker for HA. If you configure the 2 brokers to use shared-store HA then I think you can essentially get the functionality you're looking for. Justin On Tue, May 14, 2019 at 6:09 AM Felipe Fraga <felipefr...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hello and thanks for your reply, > > I guess what I would really want is to have 2 live servers sharing the same > storage on the filesystem and if my load balancer tries a server that is > killed for some reason it then sends the same requests to the other server > and it works transparently, but I recognise that is not the Artemis > architecture. > > I had a quick look on the JGroups configuration at the Artemis > configuration at the time, but I will try to understand it better to see if > I can configure the cluster in my scenario using it. Maybe using something > with FILE_PING. > > Thanks again. > > Felipe > > > On Fri, May 10, 2019 at 3:00 PM Justin Bertram <jbert...@apache.org> > wrote: > > > What kind of "high availability" do you want? High availability (i.e. HA) > > in ActiveMQ Artemis is provided by a pair of brokers - one live and one > > backup. If all your brokers are configured as live and you have no backup > > brokers then you won't technically have HA functionality. If you have two > > brokers configured as live and they're trying to access the same journal > > then only one of those brokers will be active since locks prevent the > > journal from being used by two brokers simultaneously. > > > > Also, Artemis supports JGroups which has pluggable discovery mechanisms > > that work in various clouds without the use of multicast. Have you tried > > using any of those? > > > > > > Justin > > > > On Tue, Apr 16, 2019 at 6:14 AM Felipe Fraga <felipefr...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > > > Hello all, > > > > > > I now have ActiveMQ Artemis 2.6.4 deployed as docker container in an > > > elastic cloud environment. > > > > > > Nodes can be scaled up or down at any time and actual IP's cannot be > > known > > > during configuration time, so I can't create a cluster-connection using > > > static cluster members. > > > > > > I also have an outside load balancer that is able to forward requests > to > > > these containers according to a certain algorithm. > > > > > > Now, problem is, I have a special requirement that I am not allowed for > > > this containers to use multicast requests to discover another nodes in > > the > > > cluster. Effectively, each node must run as standalone. > > > > > > I have used shared-storage ha-policy configuration, but nodes must > still > > > announce themselves to others as the documentation states. And with all > > > nodes configured as live servers, one node just waits to get a lock on > > the > > > journal shared directory. > > > > > > So, Is there a possible scenario to achieve an HA Cluster using > ActiveMQ > > > Artemis instances configured as standalone servers, using just a > > > shared-storage and my external load balancer? > > > > > > Thanks in advance for the help. > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > > Felipe > > > > > >
