We're looking to employ ActiveM with Mule ESB. Our premise for ActiveMQ is to design loadbalanced HA architecture. As such, we're looking at:
1. Using 2 Masters (M1 and M2) and Slaves (S1 and S2). Each broker instance will be networked with each other.
2. M1 and S1 will share the same filesystem as will M2 and S2 for failover.
A. Would this be the correct approach?
B. How do I change the persistence adapter in the activemq.xml file to reflect the NFS mount point shared between M1 and S1 and M2 and S2? Do I create a properties file or just change to
Thanks!
Related
I have a weblogic cluster which has 4 nodes (managed servers). Today I found two of them are down, and I found in suprise that some JMS messages are not sent.
I wonder if it's the normal behaviour ? Shouldn't the cluster continue to deliver JMS using the two available nodes ?
In order to reach high availability for JMS you should configure two things
Migratable targets.
Persistance based either on shared storage or a database.
Why migratable targets? This is because messages produced by i.e. JMSServer01 can only be processed by JMSServer01. Thus, when you configure migratable targets the JMSServer01 will be migrated automatically into another Weblogic server.
Why persistance based on shared storage or a database? This is because once the JMS Server is migrated into another server, it will try to process the messages, which must be in a shared storage or database that can be seen by all your Weblogic servers.
You can find more information here https://docs.oracle.com/middleware/1213/core/ASHIA/jmsjta.htm#ASHIA4396
I am planning on adding Redis to our application as a session and cache store. I have been looking at how to make Redis highly available on an on-premise hosted solution.
The standard approach appears to be to set up Redis as a 3 node replica and use Sentinel for the monitoring and automatic failover.
Redis 2.8 introduces Redis cluster. Does that mean it brings in automatic failover etc and we no longer need to use Sentinel?
No, Cluster and Failover are different scenarios. Also Cluster is in 3.0, not 2.8.
The standard (and minimum) setup for HA is a master and one slave (aka "a pod"), with a separate set of three nodes which run Sentinel and monitor the pod.
This is to ensure failover of the server. However, either your client library has to support using Sentinel to discover master and reconnect on failure, you implement it in your code, or you set up a TCP load balancer and a sentinel monitoring daemon to update your load balancer configuration when a failover occurs at which point the client code doesn't know or care about sentinel.
Cluster isn't there to provide HA, it is there for server-side sharding of data. For Cluster you're looking at 6-7 nodes minimum (3 master, 3 slave, 1 spare) as well as Cluster support in the client and restrictions about commands and Lua script which need to access multiple keys.
I would like to run RabbitMQ Highly Available Queues in a cluster of two RabbitMQ instances on two separate servers. It's not clear to me from the documentation how can I detect which node is considered as master by RabbitMQ in order to determine which node should I publish messages to and consume from.
Is that something that RabbitMQ resolves internally (and so I can publish and consume from master even when connected to a slave node) or should the application know about master node for each queue and connect only to it?
RabbitMQ will take care of that. The idea of HA queues is that you publish and consume from either node, and RabbitMQ will try to keep a consistent state.
The Spring XD documentation (http://docs.spring.io/spring-xd/docs/1.0.0.RC1/reference/html/) recommends Zookeeper to be run in ensemble so that Zookeeper is highly available. There is not lot of details about Redis about high availability.
If I were to run 2 XD admin instances and say 4 Container instances, I see 3 options
should I run a Redis instance in each server that runs container or admin? In that case does the Distributed runtime work properly with different Redis instances handling transport of different modules?
OR
should I run 1 Redis instance in a separate server and configure all XD instances to talk to this instance? In this case 1 instance of Redis is not highly available
OR
should I configure Redis cluster or Redis Sentinel high availability? I am not sure how XD or any other client will connect to a cluster or HA.
Thanks
I would suggest that you run a single Redis instance, there are some settings for persistence that you can change that may meet your requirements.
http://redis.io/topics/persistence
We will be adding support for Redis Sentinal, certainly in the Spring XD 1.1 release, but possibly in a maintenance release depending on what library changes we need to pick up. Spring Data Redis and Spring Boot have recent updates to support Redis Sentinal.
If you are using Redis as a message transport and want higher guarantees, I would switch to using Rabbit HA configuration of the MessageBus.
Cheers,
Mark
I was able to set up Network of Brokers with store and forward strategy and working fine. I was given bigger machines now and would like to set up Master/Slave pair within the network of brokers. I understand Masters don't need any config changes but Slaves should indicate its corresponding master with URI. However, I'm not very clear on what uri to specify in the client. I'm using 5.6 release.
For example: Two machines with MasterA, SlaveB on 1 machine, and MasterB, SlaveA on another machine. No Network connectors between Masters and Slaves but network connectors between MasterA and MasterB. I hope that I'm right till this point. What about client uri? I'm currently using nio protocol at the clients like failover:(nio:localhost1:61616,nio:localhost2:61616)?randomize=true. I specify randomize=true to balance the load between the brokers.
Please suggest what client URI should I use? Should I include all brokers URI or just masters URI? Can I still use nio protocol? I prefer to use randomize=true so that load will be balanced.
In the simplest case, the client uri should contain 4 brokers, both pairs of master/slave uris.
For the network connectors, they will need to be prepared to bridge master to master or master to slave, which ever is available.
There is a new masterslave: discovery agent in 5.6 that simplifies the configuration for a networkconnector.
http://activemq.apache.org/networks-of-brokers.html#NetworksofBrokers-MasterSlaveDiscovery