Dear activeMQ gurus, although I have not yet found an answer, this question is related to posts:
(1) http://www.nabble.com/Network-of-Brokers-configuration-limitation--td11639335s2354.html#a11639335 and (2) http://www.nabble.com/Network-of-Brokers-...-td2921710s2354.html#a3114441 I am testing the behavior of our in-house implementation of a content-based routing solution (e.g., pub-sub: that is topics and not queues) against the performances of an activeMQ network of brokers. My question is: what is the best (in terms of performances and message duplicates) configuration I can use for a cyclic network? To start simple I am using the following topology: S1--S3 | | S2--S4 The configuration file for S1 is therefore: <beans xmlns="http://www.springframework.org/schema/beans"; xmlns:amq="http://activemq.org/config/1.0"; xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance"; xsi:schemaLocation="http://www.springframework.org/schema/beans http://www.springframework.org/schema/beans/spring-beans-2.0.xsd http://activemq.org/config/1.0 http://activemq.apache.org/schema/activemq-core.xsd http://activemq.apache.org/camel/schema/spring http://activemq.apache.org/camel/schema/spring/camel-spring.xsd";> <bean class="org.springframework.beans.factory.config.PropertyPlaceholderConfigurer"/> <broker xmlns="http://activemq.org/config/1.0"; useJmx="false" brokerName="node33" persistent="false"> <transportConnectors> <transportConnector name="local" uri="tcp://localhost:17701"/> </transportConnectors> <networkConnectors> <networkConnector name="S2" dynamicOnly="true" networkTTL="15" uri="static://(tcp://node34:17702)"/> <networkConnector name="S3" dynamicOnly="true" networkTTL="15" uri="static://(tcp://node35:17703)"/> </networkConnectors> </broker> <commandAgent xmlns="http://activemq.org/config/1.0"/> </beans> In contrast to post (1) and from what I gather from http://activemq.apache.org/networks-of-brokers.html , I am specifying multiple network connectors as I want S1 to be connected to both S1 and S2. If I understand correctly, a static URI with multiple addresses (e.g., uri="static:(tcp://localhost:61616,tcp://remotehost:61616,tcp://..)") results in a random connection to just one of the provided addresses. Is this the right way to do it? >From the client logs I would definitely say no, as each client receives multiple (thousands!) copies of the same message. Are cyclic topologies supported? Could someone please suggest a configuration for them? Or should I just use hierarchical topologies? The latter is the conclusion I infer from post (2), but if there's somebody knowledgeable about this out there I'd be really happy to have a final word on this issue. Thanks in advance, Gio -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Cyclic-network-of-brokers%3A-configuration-and-duplicates-tp16834569s2354p16834569.html Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
