[jira] [Commented] (AMQ-4122) Lease Database Locker failover broken

["Gary Tully (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org>]

    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AMQ-4122?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13482310#comment-13482310 ] 

Gary Tully commented on AMQ-4122:
---------------------------------

are the broker names unique for master and slave. If not, then you need to provide unique names to the locker via setLeaseHolderId in xml config.

If possible, could you try and make a variant of org.apache.activemq.store.jdbc.LeaseDatabaseLockerTest (from activemq-core) that demonstrates the problem you are seeing.
That test uses an embedded derby instance, but you can fire off sql to that instance to simulate whatever changes you want.
                
> Lease Database Locker failover broken
> -------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: AMQ-4122
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AMQ-4122
>             Project: ActiveMQ
>          Issue Type: Bug
>    Affects Versions: 5.7.0
>         Environment: Java 7u9, SUSE 11, Mysql
>            Reporter: st.h
>
> We are using ActiveMQ 5.7.0 together with a mysql database and could not observe correct failover behavior with lease database locker.
> It seems that there is a race condition, which prevents the correct failover procedure.
> We noticed that when starting up two instances, both instance are becoming master.
> We did several test, including the following and could not observe intended functionality:
> - shutdown all instances
> - manipulate database lock that one node has lock and set expiry time in distance future
> - start up both instances. both instances are unable to acquire lock, as the lock hasn't expired, which should be correct behavior.
> - update the expiry time in database, so that the lock is expired.
> - first instance notices expired lock and becomes master
> - when second instance checks for lock, it also updates the database and becomes master.
> To my understanding the second instance should not be able to update the lock, as it is held by the first instance and should not be able to become master.

--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira