A single non-duplex networkConnector on A is all that is required as this will forward messages on demand (when it sees consumers on B provided advisory support is not disabled) from A to B.
When B has a durable consumer, the proxy or forwarding consumer on A will also be durable, with a well known subscription id that allows it to outlive the durable consumer on B. On a restart of A, this durable consumer will be auto recreated but inactive, on a reconnect of a durable consumer to B, the corresponding durable on B should be activated and messages should again flow. To answer the questions: 1) that is over kill as there is no need for message flow from B to A. 2) yes. unless you want to use selectors, in which case subscriptions cannot be coalesced 3) no, provided advisory support is enabled (the default) On 24 August 2010 00:57, Joe Niski <joe.ni...@nwea.org> wrote: > As i continue to work on this problem and dig further into the AMQ docs, > additional clarifying questions have come up about network configuration in a > store-and-forward scenario in which the broker A publishes to topics on > broker A, and broker B subscribes to identically-named topics on broker B. i > want to create durable subscriptions so the broker B will eventually receive > messages published when it's offline. > > 1) Is a single duplex networkConnector on broker B sufficient? (section > 10.2.1 of "ActiveMQ in Action" makes it seem like the answer is "yes".) > > 2) Is the "conduitSubscription" attribute required? (example 10.3 in > "ActiveMQ in Action" makes it seem like the answer is "yes".) > > 3) In the networkConnection on broker B, do i need to define > "durableDestinations" for the topics on broker A? > > 4) If the answer to (3) is "no", is it possible to point to the topics on > broker A using the ">" wildcard in the "<dynamicallyIncludedDestinations>" or > "<staticallyIncludedDestinations>" in broker B's networkConnector? > > thanks in advance, > Joe > > Joe Niski > IS Development | NWEA > > PHONE 503.212.3382 | FAX 503.639.7873 > > NWEA.ORG<3D%22http://www.nwea.org/%22> | Partnering to Help All Kids Learn > > On 08/17/2010 03:26 AM, Dejan Bosanac wrote: > > Hi Joe, > > this sounds like a bug. Did you tested it with some newer version of > ActiveMQ (as there was a lot of work in that area since 5.0.3) > > Can you test newly released 5.4.0 > http://repo1.maven.org/maven2/org/apache/activemq/apache-activemq/5.4.0/ > and see if the problem still exists? > > If it's still there, it would be great if you could raise a Jira > issue, ideally with a test case. > > Cheers > -- > Dejan Bosanac - http://twitter.com/dejanb > > Open Source Integration - http://fusesource.com/ > ActiveMQ in Action - http://www.manning.com/snyder/ > Blog - http://www.nighttale.net > > > -- http://blog.garytully.com Open Source Integration http://fusesource.com
