Re: Virtual Topics & Network of Brokers

alanmc wrote: > > I don't believe the Virtual Topics feature works in 5.1.0, even with a > single broker. > So this is only available in the current HEAD then? A. -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Virtual-Topics---Network-of-Brokers-tp19294934p19342274.html Sent from th

Re: Virtual Topics & Network of Brokers

I should add that this is ActiveMQ 5.1.0, Spring 2.5.5. Thanks, A. -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Virtual-Topics---Network-of-Brokers-tp19294934p19295192.html Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

Re: Consuming from VirtualTopic Throws Subscription Exception

Did you ever make any progress on this issue Alan? A. alanmc wrote: > > Hey Guys, > A simple "this is a known issue we're working on" or a "We no longer > support Virtual Topics" would be greatly appreciated. > > > > alanmc wrote: >> >> Looks like there's an open JIRA for this issue: >> ht

Schema Issue Using "excludedDestinations" with ActiveMQ 5.0.0

I am trying to build a "network of brokers" and also use "virtual destinations". I'm building my configuring in a test sandbox. The configuration is embedded in a Spring context: http://activemq.org/config/1.0";> I want to ad

Re: ActiveMQ 5.1 broken - repro test included

rajdavies wrote: > > I created a jira for this - AMQ-1778 > I think we are running into this issue. With an embedded broker, I have a single consumer on a queue that fails to retrieve messages 100% of the time. Sometimes it finds no messages and I am watching the Queue via JMX: there are messa

Re: Restricting Multicast Discovery

James.Strachan wrote: > > On 27/03/2008, carbon60 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> I apologize for asking basic questions! I am trying to configure >> multicast >> discovery among brokers on an insecure network. Is this possible or a >> good >> idea? &g

Restricting Multicast Discovery

I apologize for asking basic questions! I am trying to configure multicast discovery among brokers on an insecure network. Is this possible or a good idea? I don't know much about multicast, so I don't understand how to restrict which systems get connected. Thanks, A. -- View this message in

Specifying Subnet for Multicast

If I want to use discovery only on a private subnet my systems are connected to, how do adjust the multicast URI? I'm currently using: http://activemq.org/config/1.0"; dataDirectory="${data.directory}" persistent="true">

NC_testBroker_outbound already connected from

What does this message actually indicate? 13:33:36 WARN [ActiveMQ Transport: tcp://plank.local/172.16.2.251:61818] network.DemandForwardingBridge| Network connection between vm://testBroker#20 and tcp://plank.local/172.16.2.251:61818 shutdown due to a remote error: javax.jms.InvalidClientIDExcept

Re: Configuration Confusion

carbon60 wrote: > > But the master/slave setup seems to cause a bottleneck with a single > broker, no? I would rather have multiple brokers sharing the load in a > peer-to-peer fashion. > I believe that this config should work: http://activemq.org/config/1.0"; bro

Re: Configuration Confusion

ttmdev wrote: > > You can think of the peer connector as a superset of the VM connector. The > peer connector uses the VM connector to launch and connect to an > 'embedded' broker, but it also configures the embedded broker to establish > network connectors to other embedded brokers within the L

Re: Configuration Confusion

carbon60 wrote: > > On 11-Mar-08, at 10:01 AM, James Strachan wrote: >>> I need to configure my brokers to fault-tolerant in a two-node >>> cluster. I'm configuring this directly inside Spring. >>> >>> I believe I need to use some form of auto-disc