Hi Tim,
in-lined:
On 2 Dec 2008, at 14:14, Tim Sparg wrote:
Hi guys
I'm new to ActiveMQ, and am still trying to learn my way around how
everything works.
I'm trying to find a definitive answer as to the network impact of
broker to
broker communication as opposed to broker to consumer communication.
The "How do distributed queues work" page is a bit vague to me. it
says
"Store and forward is often used in large networks where producers
are on
one LAN and consumers are on another LAN and you wish to use a
broker on
each LAN as a kind of network concentrator to minimise chattiness
over the
WAN between them (and to minimise the number of connections required
across
the WAN too)"
My understanding of the above paragraph is that broker to broker
communication would reduce network traffic in the case where each
individual
LAN has multiple consumers, as there is only one component talking.
If each individual LAN only had one consumer(as opposed to multiple)
would
broker to broker communication still have an advantage over broker to
consumer communication?
No - it wouldn't - with only one consumer - you may as well avoid the
additional 'hops' of going through a broker
what do you mean when you say that Broker to broker communication
generally
creates less traffic? does that mean that it is according to your
configuration, or according to the type of distributed messaging you
use?
A little of both - basically it will only send one copy of a message
across the network - which isn't really applicable to Queues. It also
acts as a buffer, because it will store messages locally to its store
if the network is down - whilst a normal consumer would block until it
could reconnect to the remote broker.
--
View this message in context:
http://www.nabble.com/Network-of-Brokers-or-Standard-connections-tp20768181p20792976.html
Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Hope that helps a little :)
cheers,
Rob
Rob Davies
http://fusesource.com
http://rajdavies.blogspot.com/
