You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to users@activemq.apache.org by Aymeric Alibert <ay...@gmail.com> on 2007/06/15 13:51:30 UTC
HP ServiceGuard & ActiveMQ failover
Does anybody has experience using HP ServiceGuard package failover to provide
HA?
I would like to use it instead of a Master/Slave configuration.
It seems to me that both configuration should be roughlty equivalent (with
Master/Slave probably being faster to failover).
Any remark/advice on that configuration?
Thanks,
Aymeric
--
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/HP-ServiceGuard---ActiveMQ-failover-tf3927386s2354.html#a11137905
Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Re: HP ServiceGuard & ActiveMQ failover
Posted by James Strachan <ja...@gmail.com>.
On 6/15/07, Aymeric Alibert <ay...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Basically you run your application on a virtual host. If the host fails, the
> virtual host is brought down and restarted on a different hardware. Since
> it's HA, all information from the filesystem are preserved and the new host
> assumes the role of the old one (same ip, ...).
>
> It seems to me that it's roughtly equivalent to Master/Slave. Just easier in
> our case to configure as we do it for several other apps already.
Sounds fine then.
--
James
-------
http://macstrac.blogspot.com/
Re: HP ServiceGuard & ActiveMQ failover
Posted by Aymeric Alibert <ay...@gmail.com>.
Basically you run your application on a virtual host. If the host fails, the
virtual host is brought down and restarted on a different hardware. Since
it's HA, all information from the filesystem are preserved and the new host
assumes the role of the old one (same ip, ...).
It seems to me that it's roughtly equivalent to Master/Slave. Just easier in
our case to configure as we do it for several other apps already.
Thanks,
Aymeric.
James.Strachan wrote:
>
> On 6/15/07, Aymeric Alibert <ay...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Does anybody has experience using HP ServiceGuard package failover to
>> provide
>> HA?
>
> Afraid not.
>
>
>> I would like to use it instead of a Master/Slave configuration.
>> It seems to me that both configuration should be roughlty equivalent
>> (with
>> Master/Slave probably being faster to failover).
>>
>> Any remark/advice on that configuration?
>
> I don't know the HP product well but from a glance at their site it
> looks like its mostly a HA storage system right? If thats the case you
> could use the shared file based master/slave (and let the ActiveMQ
> clients do their automatic failover from master to slave).
>
> http://activemq.apache.org/shared-file-system-master-slave.html
>
> --
> James
> -------
> http://macstrac.blogspot.com/
>
>
--
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/HP-ServiceGuard---ActiveMQ-failover-tf3927386s2354.html#a11138802
Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Re: HP ServiceGuard & ActiveMQ failover
Posted by James Strachan <ja...@gmail.com>.
On 6/15/07, Aymeric Alibert <ay...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Does anybody has experience using HP ServiceGuard package failover to provide
> HA?
Afraid not.
> I would like to use it instead of a Master/Slave configuration.
> It seems to me that both configuration should be roughlty equivalent (with
> Master/Slave probably being faster to failover).
>
> Any remark/advice on that configuration?
I don't know the HP product well but from a glance at their site it
looks like its mostly a HA storage system right? If thats the case you
could use the shared file based master/slave (and let the ActiveMQ
clients do their automatic failover from master to slave).
http://activemq.apache.org/shared-file-system-master-slave.html
--
James
-------
http://macstrac.blogspot.com/