Hi Eric, yes I think this is the case - I think we need to ensure that the old connection is destroyed when the new one joins
cheers, Rob Rob Davies follow me: http://twitter.com/rajdavies I work here: http://fusesource.com My Blog: http://rajdavies.blogspot.com/ I wrote this: http://www.manning.com/snyder/ On 21 Jul 2010, at 10:09, Eric-AWL wrote: > > I was wrong. > > here : > > STOP : Network Fault : Network Off > > Link 1 : ADMIN Link port 61601 : (DUPLEX back) Link from SIBBusModule > TestDeCharge(Client) to SIBBusSupervisor port 61601, broken > 2010-07-19 14:00:23,733 [isor-td0sib01s]] INFO DemandForwardingBridge > - SIBBusSupervisor-td0sib01s bridge to SIBBusModule-TestDeCharge-td0sib01v > stopped > > So the bridge was only destroyed by the InactivityMonitor thread. > > This trace was associated to another not Duplex bridge with the same > brokers, and not the duplex one. > > > But I have two questions : > > I understand that when a network fault is detected on the "network > connector" side of a duplex connection, the bridge is stopped on this side, > but the other bridge side (transport side) is detected only by the > InactivityMonitor. Is this true ? > > In this case, if a new DemandForwardingBridge is created between the 2 > brokers, then the "transport side" sees temporarily (while InactivityMonitor > doesn't destroy the first bridge) 2 brokers instead of one, and can send > back some messages by using the faulty connection. Is this true ? > > Thank you in advance > > Eric-AWL > > > > Eric-AWL wrote: >> >> SIBBusModule-TestDeCharge-td0sib01v Log >> Link 1 : ADMIN Link port 61601 : Try to connect (DUPLEX initiator) from >> SIBBusModule TestDeCharge (Client) to SIBBusSupervisor port 61601 >> 2010-07-19 09:57:18,896 [arge-td0sib01v]] INFO DiscoveryNetworkConnector >> >> - Establishing network connection from >> vm://SIBBusModule-TestDeCharge-td0sib01v to >> tcp://td0sib01s.priv.atos.fr:61601?useLocalHost=false >> >> Link 1 : ADMIN Link port 61601 : Connect (DUPLEX initiator) from >> SIBBusModule TestDeCharge (Client) to SIBBusSupervisor port 61601 >> 2010-07-19 09:57:19,068 [rge-td0sib01v#4] INFO DemandForwardingBridge >> >> - Network connection between vm://SIBBusModule-TestDeCharge-td0sib01v#4 >> and >> tcp://td0sib01s.priv.atos.fr/10.21.195.130:61601(SIBBusSupervisor-td0sib01s) >> has been established. >> >> >> STOP : Network Fault : Network Off >> >> Link 1 : ADMIN Link port 61601 : (DUPLEX initiator) Link from SIBBusModule >> TestDeCharge(Client) to SIBBusSupervisor port 61601, broken >> 2010-07-19 14:00:23,258 [arge-td0sib01v]] INFO DemandForwardingBridge >> >> - SIBBusModule-TestDeCharge-td0sib01v bridge to SIBBusSupervisor-td0sib01s >> stopped >> >> Reconnect Processus : Network On >> >> Link 1 new : ADMIN Link port 61601 : Try to connect (DUPLEX initiator) >> SIBBusModule TestDeCharge(Client) to SIBBusSupervisor port 61601 >> 2010-07-19 14:00:55,737 [arge-td0sib01v]] INFO DiscoveryNetworkConnector >> >> - Establishing network connection from >> vm://SIBBusModule-TestDeCharge-td0sib01v to >> tcp://td0sib01s.priv.atos.fr:61601?useLocalHost=false >> >> Link 1 new : ADMIN Link port 61601 : Connect (DUPLEX >> initiator)SIBBusModule TestDeCharge(Client) to SIBBusSupervisor port 61601 >> 2010-07-19 14:00:55,857 [ge-td0sib01v#11] INFO DemandForwardingBridge >> >> - Network connection between vm://SIBBusModule-TestDeCharge-td0sib01v#11 >> and >> tcp://td0sib01s.priv.atos.fr/10.21.195.130:61601(SIBBusSupervisor-td0sib01s) >> has been established. >> >> >> Link 1 doesn’t seem to work. >> >> SIBBusSupervisor log >> >> Link 1 : ADMIN Link port 61601 : Connect (DUPLEX back) from SIBBusModule >> TestDeCharge (Client) port 36485 to SIBBusSupervisor port 61601 >> 2010-07-19 09:57:19,097 [0.29.12.1:36485] INFO TransportConnection >> >> - Created Duplex Bridge back to SIBBusModule-TestDeCharge-td0sib01v >> 2010-07-19 09:57:19,097 [or-td0sib01s#12] INFO DemandForwardingBridge >> >> - Network connection between vm://SIBBusSupervisor-td0sib01s#12 and >> tcp:///10.29.12.1:36485(SIBBusModule-TestDeCharge-td0sib01v) has been >> established. >> >> STOP : Network Fault : Network Off >> >> Link 1 : ADMIN Link port 61601 : (DUPLEX back) Link from SIBBusModule >> TestDeCharge(Client) to SIBBusSupervisor port 61601, broken >> 2010-07-19 14:00:23,733 [isor-td0sib01s]] INFO DemandForwardingBridge >> >> - SIBBusSupervisor-td0sib01s bridge to SIBBusModule-TestDeCharge-td0sib01v >> stopped >> >> >> Reconnect Processus : Network On >> >> Link 1 new : ADMIN Link port 61601 : Connect (DUPLEX back) from >> SIBBusModule TestDeCharge (Client) port 33840 to SIBBusSupervisor port >> 61601 >> 2010-07-19 14:00:55,920 [0.29.12.1:33840] INFO TransportConnection >> >> - Created Duplex Bridge back to SIBBusModule-TestDeCharge-td0sib01v >> 2010-07-19 14:00:55,921 [or-td0sib01s#22] INFO DemandForwardingBridge >> >> - Network connection between vm://SIBBusSupervisor-td0sib01s#22 and >> tcp:///10.29.12.1:33840(SIBBusModule-TestDeCharge-td0sib01v) has been >> established. >> >> STOP Old DUPLEX back Connection >> >> Link 1 old : ADMIN Link port 61601 : (DUPLEX back) Link SIBBusModule >> TestDeCharge (Client) port 36485 to SIBBusSupervisor port 61601 is broken >> 2010-07-19 14:00:58,939 [wor...@1ecc696e] WARN DemandForwardingBridge >> >> - Network connection between vm://SIBBusSupervisor-td0sib01s#12 and >> tcp:///10.29.12.1:36485 shutdown due to a remote error: >> org.apache.activemq.transport.InactivityIOException: Channel was inactive >> for too long: /10.29.12.1:36485 >> 2010-07-19 14:00:58,945 [0.29.12.1:36485] INFO DemandForwardingBridge >> >> - SIBBusSupervisor-td0sib01s bridge to SIBBusModule-TestDeCharge-td0sib01v >> stopped >> >> >> It seems that bridge on Link 1 is finally broken ??? >> >> Eric-AWL >> >> >> Eric-AWL wrote: >>> >>> Hi >>> >>> In the case where network is alternatively on/off in a duplex multicast >>> configuration, I first discovered that the "network connector side" >>> broker was sometimes blocked on "RemoteBrokerNameKnownLatch" latch. >>> >>> I think that I resolved this problem by >>> - adding a countdown() call on this latch at the end of the stop() method >>> - correctly managing an exception to alert the discovery connector that >>> the bridge was disposed during the start call. >>> >>> Now, I think that I have a problem on the other side with this >>> configuration. >>> T0 - A duplex connection is correctly >>> established >>> T0+X minutes - the network is down, the duplex bridge >>> back is stopped, but the corresponding transport (back) connection seems >>> not to be closed >>> T0+X minutes + x ms - the networl is up : a new transport >>> connection want to be established and is established >>> T0+X minutes + y seconds - the transport inactivity thread closes the >>> old transport connection >>> >>> (y seconds >> x milliseconds) >>> >>> All seems Ok, but no message are exchanged with this bridge. >>> >>> Eric-AWL >>> >> >> > > -- > View this message in context: > http://old.nabble.com/Duplex-and-network-fault.-tp29205793p29223448.html > Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. >
