Terracotta Discussion Forums

Hello,

I have one solution that uses Mule with ActiveMQ, in a spring container, and works very well, but now i have some performance issues because i have a lot of messages and need to cluster the solution.

I cluster ActiveMQ in database queues, but i get some ugly result, 1 machine with VM transport process more messages that 2 machines with clustering queues in database :(

Now i'm trying to cluster :) ActiveMQ with terracotta because the VmTransport uses a LinkedBloquingQueue so it could be cluster :)

Can anyone have the same need ?

Thanks

Yes, you could try clustering your queue with Terracotta. We see this use case quite a few times with our user-base.

Wrt Mule, we don't officially support it yet - but based on some discussions with the Mule community, seems that there are some stateful components within the Mule implementation that could be clustered (Aggregator for example) to provide users with HA and more capabilities. We can report some additional details, once we work with that community some more.

Let us know if u have issues clustering the LBQ within the ActiveMQ impl.
Iyer.

cerdeira wrote:

...

Now i'm trying to cluster :) ActiveMQ with terracotta because the VmTransport uses a LinkedBloquingQueue so it could be cluster :)

Can anyone have the same need ?

Thanks

Yes, I'am trying to cluster with terracotta as well. I adapted the vm transport to cluster the queues, however what I am doing is not yet working.

I changed the orignal VM transport to use a BlockingQueue instead of a LinkedList and updated my tc-config.xml to JMVM cluster it. However no succes :(

Where you succesfull with it and maybe give some tips?