Hello,

@Keith: Thanks for the confirmation. I might indeed get back to you with a 
patch for this.

@Rob: Your remarks/questions are very accurate. 
Our deployed solution uses multiple broker instances but they all have the same 
version and are upgraded at the same time. So we don't really have the risk you 
are highlighting although I understand that this might be problematic for a 
different use case.
Having a single schema holding all the messages of all the brokers' 
virtualhosts simplifies the administrative operations. Creating a schema 
requires rights that we don't always have (it involves creating a user and 
assigning privileges, ...). If we hot-deploy a new broker instance it is 
simpler to connect it to an existing schema and not having to create a separate 
schema. Having said this, I agree that the performance might be negatively due 
to the contention on the shared schema.

Best regards,
Rawad

-----Original Message-----
From: Rob Godfrey [mailto:[email protected]] 
Sent: Wednesday, November 30, 2016 10:42 AM
To: [email protected]; Keith Wall <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [java-broker] JDBCMessageStore

I guess my question here is what the benefit to sharing a schema is?  You can 
already have multiple brokers running against the same Oracle installation as 
long as they are using different schemas... If they use the same schema would 
we be expecting the instances to store their data in the same tables?  If so 
what would happen when a new version of Qpid comes out that updates the table 
structures?  At the moment the upgrade process converts all the data in the 
tables into any new table structure, but how would that wrk if there were data 
from multiple Qpid installations in there?  Sharing tables would also seem to 
potentially cause more contention between instances that would not occur if the 
data for different instance is held separately,

-- Rob

On 30 November 2016 at 08:32, Keith W <[email protected]> wrote:

> Hi Rawad
>
> Your analysis of the code is correct, currently the JDBCMessageStore
> feature assumes exclusive use of the a schema.    This is really a
> reflection of the way this store module evolved - out of the Derby 
> store.  It probably would not be too hard to change the code so that 
> sharing a schema becomes possible, but it is not something on the road 
> map for the near future.  If the feature would be useful to you, feel 
> free to submit a patch.
>
> Kind regards, Keith Wall.
>
>
>
> On 29 November 2016 at 16:19, Rawad Assaf <[email protected]> wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I am trying to use a JDBC message store to persist messages of the
> default
> > virtualhost on an Oracle RDBMS.
> >
> > Looking at the SQL statements used (as per
> > https://github.com/apache/qpid-java/blob/trunk/broker-
> core/src/main/java/org/apache/qpid/server/store/
> AbstractJDBCMessageStore.java)
> > it doesn't look as if I can persist messages from multiple brokers 
> > in the same Database Instance.
> >
> > Is this really the case? If yes, are there any plans to add such a
> feature
> > in future? It would be really practical not to have to create a 
> > separate Database Instance for each broker.
> >
> >
> > Best regards,
> > Rawad.
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For 
> additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
>
>
*******************************

This e-mail contains information for the intended recipient only. It may 
contain proprietary material or confidential information. If you are not the 
intended recipient you are not authorised to distribute, copy or use this 
e-mail or any attachment to it. Murex cannot guarantee that it is virus free 
and accepts no responsibility for any loss or damage arising from its use. If 
you have received this e-mail in error please notify immediately the sender and 
delete the original email received, any attachments and all copies from your 
system.

Reply via email to