Re: Failover all clients to same secondary broker

You could try something like DNS failover or a software loadbalancer presenting a VIP, but the easiest way might be to change you app to handle connecting to multiple brokers On Tue, Apr 29, 2014 at 11:57 AM, mchinea wrote: > So it seems the only way to be sure clients are connected to either b

Re: Failover all clients to same secondary broker

So it seems the only way to be sure clients are connected to either broker reliably is to have one and only one of the brokers running and if/when it fails, start running the broker in the second server so the clients can switch to it. Is this correct? -- View this message in context: http://ac

Re: Apache NMS: using other SSL/TLS-Version rather than SslProtocols.Default?

On 04/28/2014 04:45 AM, Tom_Z wrote: Hi guys, while looking at NMS we found that in SslTransport.cs it is hard coded to use 'SslProtocols.Default' which points to TLS

Re: INDIVIDUAL_ACKNOWLEDGE with a durable consumer

You're agree. But to use commit/rollback session, i need to use TRANSACTED session. So the performance cost is very expensive and i really need performance. -- View this message in context: http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/INDIVIDUAL-ACKNOWLEDGE-with-a-durable-consumer-tp4680403p4680624.h

Re: INDIVIDUAL_ACKNOWLEDGE with a durable consumer

you can reuse a session after a commit/rollback so no need to close. On 28 April 2014 08:46, meurwinn wrote: > Sounds the only one solution but the problem is that open and close a session > for each message wil have a performance cost or not ? > > > > > -- > View this message in context: > http

Apache NMS: using other SSL/TLS-Version rather than SslProtocols.Default?

Hi guys, while looking at NMS we found that in SslTransport.cs it is hard coded to use 'SslProtocols.Default' which points to TLS 1.0 only (see API

Re: Non persistent Messages Not getting expired even after expiration time exceeded

I have logged JIRA request for this.. https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AMQ-5158 Let me know if something else is required from my side. Thanks, Anuj -- View this message in context: http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/Non-persistent-Messages-Not-getting-expired-even-after-expiration-t

Re: INDIVIDUAL_ACKNOWLEDGE with a durable consumer

Sounds the only one solution but the problem is that open and close a session for each message wil have a performance cost or not ? -- View this message in context: http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/INDIVIDUAL-ACKNOWLEDGE-with-a-durable-consumer-tp4680403p4680609.html Sent from the ActiveM