Nicky Sandhu wrote:
>
>
> Joel Schaubert wrote:
>>
>> What I have found during my testing of the network of brokers is that you
>> do get this behaviour. If I write 100 message to broker A, then I kill
>> it, then I subscribe to broker B, I can read all of the messages. (and
>> various versions of this scenario tested in our QA environment).
>>
> Interesting. That means the broker A is pushing messages to broker B
> before sending publisher the ack. Thats quite an overhead. Or is broker A
> somehow sharing the message store with broker B? I thought the forwarding
> was on a demand based policy. Did you configure it differently?
>
You should test it yourself because it's so easy to do so. You can run 2
(or more) brokers on one box, just move the ports for the second broker to a
different set. You'll need to switch what subdir it uses for its persistent
storage, and I think the jmx and that's about it.
I did no special config on the brokers (except moving ports as above) and
just added static route to the other broker (uses the openwire connector so
you want that connectors port number if you use static).
I should add that all of my messages were perstistent, with client-ack set
(not auto-ack which is default).
I think you'll be surprised how easy this is to setup and test, and how well
it works.
I am having a problem with the STOMP connector tossing away prefetch
messages, but if your access is java then that's not an issue.
[ https://issues.apache.org/activemq/browse/AMQ-1287 Stomp Losing Prefetch
Messages]
Joel Schaubert
--
View this message in context:
http://www.nabble.com/How-to-have-a-highly-available-and-scalable-setup-using-network-of-brokers--tf3954224s2354.html#a11238730
Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
