[rabbitmq-discuss] Broker failover

[Matthew Sackman]

Hi Niko,

On Thu, Aug 20, 2009 at 11:09:32AM +0100, Niko Felger wrote:
> Is there a way to achieve some of this in a clustered setup? I guess our
> requirements are not so much HA of the whole messaging subsystem, but rather
> that an as-large-as-possible proportion of messages gets processed
> _eventually_. The scenario I am mainly worried about is when producers
> suddenly cannot publish anymore because the server has gone away and thus
> any messages are lost at that point.
>
> We tried using a dumb load balancer (in front of both producers and
> consumers) to achieve this, but so far this has caused us more trouble than
> it saved, see here:
> http://www.nabble.com/RabbitMQ-load-balancing-failover-with-LVS-td24683230.html#a24683230

Ahh, interesting.

We do have some suspicions that the failover can be made to work with
clustering - provided that when the new node comes up it takes over the
IP / hostname of the failed node, it *might* just work. However, be
aware this pretty much came out of a 5 minute conversation in the office
yesterday and we've not even attempted it let alone fully tested it.
However, we think it might work! :D

LinuxHA can indeed do MAC address stealing and thus IP etc. So I would
suggest, if you have the time to spare, you start down that route.

Matthew