Tom Samplonius-2 wrote: > > > I don't understand the distinction between, "subscriber can not lose a > message" vs. "subscriber can drop messages when it is disconnected". > Subscribers are only going to lose messages unless they disconnect, or are > disconnected. So I think you want durable messages. > >
Let me try to clarify my use case this way: I have a server that maintains the master copy of all business (domain) objects. I have multiple thick clients (Swing based) that replicate these objects and show them in various views. I am using JMS publish/subscribe to keep the client objects in sync with the server objects. This synchronization is only necessary when the Swing client is running - when the user closes the app, all client state is gone and no synchronization is necessary. That's what I meant by "there is no need to receive messages when the subscriber is down or inactive". Given this context and the assumption that I will use a transacted session or acked messages at the client end, is durability necessary? In other words, if an active JMS subscriber does not successfully ack a message (because of a network hiccup), will ActiveMQ retry sending the message? Thanks. Naresh -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/How-to-ensure-reliability-of-publish-subscribe-against-occassional-network-hiccup--tf4068985s2354.html#a11613830 Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
