thank you-- will advise
On Wed, Oct 12, 2022 at 11:03 PM Tetreault, Lucas
wrote:
> Hey James,
>
> For what it's worth... You can continue using static:(failover:(uri1,
> uri2)) with the addition of the following query params
> "?randomize=false&maxReconnectAttempts=0" which is functionally equiv
Hey James,
For what it's worth... You can continue using static:(failover:(uri1, uri2))
with the addition of the following query params
"?randomize=false&maxReconnectAttempts=0" which is functionally equivalent to
the "masterslave" protocol, e.g.:
static:(failover:(uri1,uri1)?randomize=false&
Hello James-
First thing— You have an inconsistent url — change "static:(failover:” to
uri=“masterslave:(tcp://hosta,tcp:hostb )” ..
Network Connectors imply failover and retry, and the ‘masterslave’ discovery
does a connect HOSTA, then HOSTB convention.
-Matt Pavlovich
> On Oct 12, 2022,
Hello,
We have a network of brokers in a hub/spoke setup
where each client (spoke) is configured with failover to the hub
(HOSTA/HOSTB) as follows:
The AMQ process on HOSTB is not available, we have external processes that
manage whether AMQ runs on HOSTA or HOSTB, but HOSTA and
