Hi- I am working on a system where we want to send a message each time an entity is updated. I really want to commit the message to the broker using a local transaction - I can't use XA. If the local transaction rolls back and the entity isn't committed, then I don't want the message to be sent. If the local transaction commits I want to guarantee that the message is put on a Queue.
I was thinking that perhaps if I use an embedded broker and some form of JDBC Persistence Store, I could configure the embedded broker to use the same DB connection (and JDBC transaction) as the rest of the application. Is this possible? This will be relatively low-volume, so I'm not too concerned about throughput and latency. I'm more interested in ensuring transactional integrity without XA transactions. Please let me know if you have any suggestions or tips. Thanks! -Adam -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Commiting-Messages-with-Local-Transaction-%28not-XA%29-tp25151371p25151371.html Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
