[rabbitmq-discuss] Stability/Reliability of a cluster with mirrored queue
simon at rabbitmq.com
Tue Dec 17 11:24:21 GMT 2013
Well, there is in general a tendency towards increased stability in the
HA code :-) I would say that most of the bugs that we are fixing these
days are reasonably hard to hit. But there are regressions occasionally
and there was a fairly severe one in 3.2.0, so that could have been the
source of your problems.
Of course there is also the issue of clustering and network partitions;
you will definitely experience more problems with clustering if
deploying it across an unreliable network.
On 16/12/2013 15:10, Mirosław Nagaś wrote:
> I would like to know your opinion about stability/reliability of a
> cluster with mirrored queues. I'm considering to use it and even tried
> with 3.2.0. I guess I don't have to point out how huge disappointment
> was it. And what's worse, if you skim recent releases notes, it's really
> hard to find a release without some bug fixes related to clustering
> and/or HA.
> What I'm asking is, is a cluster setup with mirrored queues stable and
> reliable and past bugs/problems appeared really rarely in anomalous use
> cases/conditions or the reality is that it has some
> stability/reliability issues that affects every robust use cases at some
> We have been running a single node without interruption on production
> (cloud) for about 1,5 year. Having in mind all past bugs, what I'm
> worried about is that, in a year from now I will come to a conclusion
> that because of a cluster with mirrored queue my overall reliability
> and/or stability was much worse than eg. just two separate nodes behind
> LB (maintainability is not a big deal here; we use persistence and can
> afford restoring messages from a failed node manually in case of a cloud
> machine failure).
> Maybe someone can share his experience from production run?
> rabbitmq-discuss mailing list
> rabbitmq-discuss at lists.rabbitmq.com
More information about the rabbitmq-discuss