Suchitha, Thanks for your help. I thought a URL of the form "tcp://<host>..." refers to an external broker, not an embedded one? Am I mistaken?
I need to run the broker within the servlet container VM, not as a separate process. Thanks, /U -------------- Original message ---------------------- From: "Suchitha Koneru (sukoneru)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Hi , > I also have two web apps running in Tomcat 5.5.20.Active mq > version being used is 4.0.2. > Our application uses an embedded broker, This broker is started by a > servlet context Listener, which is specified in web.xml of one of the > web apps. Both the web apps connect to this broker and exchange > messages. I am using tcp mode of transport tcp://localhost:"+portNum+ , > for the broker. > Both the web apps connect to the broker using the url > failover:tcp://localhost:"+this.portNum > > Make sure that the broker is started by a servlet context listener , > which is part of the web app , which is started first in order. For > example , in my case I have two webapps servlets and users, > Servlets is started before users, so there by the broker is a part of > servlets web app. > > > > > Hope this helps. > Thanks, > Suchitha. > > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Monday, March 26, 2007 8:31 PM > To: users@activemq.apache.org > Subject: Re: Problems with VM transport > > > To follow up on my last mail: I can perhaps avoid the problem by using > distinct brokernames for each webapp; but that would create distinct > embedded brokers perhaps? I need both the webapps to share the same > broker so they receive messages published by each other. > > Regards, > > /U > > -------------- Original message ---------------------- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > Hi - > > > > I am using the embedded broker in a servlet container. Each webapp > > in the servlet container instantiates a connection factory that refers > > > to broker URL of > > > > vm://localhost?broker.persistent=false > > > > as follows: > > > > (Servlet Container > > (WebApp1 > > ConnectionFactory -> > > vm://localhost?broker.persistent=false > > ) > > ) > > > > and this works fine. But as soon as I instantiate another webapp > > (WebApp2) that also uses embedded broker as follows: > > > > (Servlet Container > > (WebApp1 > > ConnectionFactory -> > > vm://localhost?broker.persistent=false > > ) > > (WebApp2 > > ConnectionFactory -> > > vm://localhost?broker.persistent=false > > ) > > ) > > > > the second webapp fails with the JMSException given below: > > > > javax.jms.JMSException: Could not create Transport. Reason: > > javax.management.InstanceAlreadyExistsException: > > org.apache.activemq:BrokerName=localhost,Type=Broker > > at > > > org.apache.activemq.util.JMSExceptionSupport.create(JMSExceptionSupport. > java:33) > > at > > org.apache.activemq.ActiveMQConnectionFactory.createTransport(ActiveMQ > > Connection > > Factory.java:229) > > at > > org.apache.activemq.ActiveMQConnectionFactory.createActiveMQConnection > > (ActiveMQC > > onnectionFactory.java:242) > > at > > org.apache.activemq.ActiveMQConnectionFactory.createActiveMQConnection > > (ActiveMQC > > onnectionFactory.java:211) > > at > > org.apache.activemq.ActiveMQConnectionFactory.createConnection(ActiveM > > QConnectio > > nFactory.java:158) > > at > > org.springframework.jms.listener.AbstractMessageListenerContainer.crea > > teConnecti > > on(AbstractMessageListenerContainer.java:989) > > at > > org.springframework.jms.listener.AbstractMessageListenerContainer.refr > > eshSharedC > > onnection(AbstractMessageListenerContainer.java:455) > > //... > > > > > > I thought I could (tentatively) work around this problem by disabling > > Jmx, so I switched the broker URL (for both webapps) to > > > > vm://localhost?broker.persistent=false&useJmx=false > > > > This did not help. Is there fundamentally a problem with multiple > > instances of ActiveMQConnectionFactory referring to the same broker > > URL (which is likely to to be the case when using embedded broker)? > > > > Thanks, > > > > /U > > > > > > -------------- Original message ---------------------- > > From: Adrian Co <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > > Adrian, > > > > > > > > Thanks for the note. > > > > > > > > > > Startup: vm://localhost > > > > > > During runtime (after an event): > > > > > > failover(vm://localhost,tcp://remote:61616) > > > > > > > > > > > > Would modifying the broker URL of the connection > factory cause > > > problems? > > > > > > > > > > > Personally, I'm not sure if you can I haven't tried it, > > > > but I > > don't > > > > > think it makes sense to make a vm transport failover. > > > > The > > assumption > > > is > > > > > that you have a broker running in the same vm as your > jms client. > > If > > > the > > > > > broker crashes, it means your client *should* have > > > > crashed also > > and > > > it > > > > > can't failover over to a remote broker anymore. > > > > > > > > Makes sense - now I see why someone else referred to me as > 'retard' :-). > > > > I need to have the client listen to two different brokers (the > > > > embedded and the external) at the same time (so that the client > > > > receives messages > > > published > > > > by both the brokers and the messages published by the client are > > > > sent to > > both > > > the > > > > brokers). Is this the correct URI to network the embedded broker > > > > with an > > > external broker? > > > > > > > > static:(vm://localhost,tcp://remotehost:61616) > > > > > > > Hum. AFAIK, static just tells the client to choose one url to > > > connect to. I don't think you can listen to two or more brokers > > > using a single connection. You might want to network the brokers > > > together if thats possible. If someone can let me know if its > > > possible to listen to more than two brokers using a single jms > > > connection, I'd appreciate it also. :-) > > > > > > > > Could you also clarify an additional question? If I instantiate > > > > multiple connection factories in the same VM pointing to the > > > > embedded broker would all the cconnection factories in the VM > > > > share the same broker (as opposed to attempting to "instantiating > > > > a new embedded broker" if such a thing were possible)? > > > > > > > If they are in the same jvm, and there's already an embedded broker, > > > > it will be reused. > > > > Thanks again, > > > > > > > > /U > > > > > > > > > > > > >
