ver that bridge is already running to take the messages that are
now coming in to it.
I don’t know if you have thoughts on any simpler ways.
From: Clebert Suconic
Date: Thursday, September 22, 2022 at 11:07 AM
To: users@activemq.apache.org
Subject: Re: Dual Mirroring and Core Bridges
I wouldn'
core bridges for additional broker
> connections
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> From: Stephen Baker
> Date: Monday, September 19, 2022 at 8:38 AM
> To: users@activemq.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Dual Mirroring and Core B
Or would you suggest swapping the core bridges for additional broker connections
From: Stephen Baker
Date: Monday, September 19, 2022 at 8:38 AM
To: users@activemq.apache.org
Subject: Re: Dual Mirroring and Core Bridges
To isolate different sets of services they
for disaster recovery.
I’m proposing something like:
...
fowardAfoo
foo
Should that be ok?
From: Clebert Suconic
Date: Friday, September 16, 2022 at 1:01 PM
To: users@activemq.apache.org
Subject: Re: Dual Mirroring and Core Bridges
I wouldn't use both (bridge and mirroring betwee
I wouldn't use both (bridge and mirroring between the servers) I would
simplify your setup with either one or the other.
On Fri, Sep 16, 2022 at 8:19 AM Stephen Baker
wrote:
>
> We are running artemis multiple artemis clusters between hot and cold
> datacenters in a dual mirroring setup, so:
>
>
We are running artemis multiple artemis clusters between hot and cold
datacenters in a dual mirroring setup, so:
A mirrors with A’
B mirrors with B’
We also have core bridges between A and B so:
A.forwardBfoo goes to B.foo
A’.forwardBfoo goes to B’.foo (by virtue of symmetric configuration)
B.f
