Herbert, please start a new thread about your issue. It seems more like a clustering issue than a federation one. In any case, this thread is about Erik's hub & spoke federation issue.
Thanks! Justin On Thu, Feb 8, 2024 at 6:31 AM <herbert.helmstr...@systema.com> wrote: > Hello folks, > > I am trying for some time a symmetric configuration without explicit > address federation. > Seemingly it works until a client failover changes the direction of > addressing. > Then the address memory in the artemis broker grows despite of the message > TTL settings. > The broker configuration is a simple cluster connection and probably wrong > for the intended purpose. > I now think that address federation is what I had been missing. Is this > true? > The example in the federation documentation is too complex for me, though. > How would address federation for a symmetric or call it “two broker mesh” > for all addresses look like? > > Best Regards > > Herbert > > ------------------------------ > > *Herbert Helmstreit* > Senior Software Engineer > > Phone: +49 941 / 7 83 92 36 > herbert.helmstr...@systema.com > > www.systema.com > > [image: LinkedIn] <https://www.linkedin.com/company/systema-gmbh/>[image: > Facebook] <https://de-de.facebook.com/SYSTEMA.automation/>[image: XING] > <https://www.xing.com/pages/systemagmbh> > > SYSTEMA > Systementwicklung Dipl.-Inf. Manfred Austen GmbH > > Manfred-von-Ardenne-Ring 6 | 01099 Dresden > HRB 11256 Amtsgericht Dresden | USt.-ID DE 159 607 786 > Geschäftsführer: Manfred Austen, CEO und Dr. Ulf Martin, COO > > P Please check whether a printout of this e-mail is really necessary. > > > > > Von: "Justin Bertram" <jbert...@apache.org> > An: "users@activemq.apache.org" <users@activemq.apache.org> > Datum: 07.02.2024 15:19 > Betreff: [Ext] Re: Is a federation of Hub-spoke broker topology > possible with Artemis? > ------------------------------ > > > > The documentation does mention using a "hub and spoke" federation topology > [1]. However, as you noted, there's no example configuration. I wonder if > this may be down to the "max-hops" setting you're using. > > Can you provide the broker.xml from your brokers attempting to use hub & > spoke? > > > Justin > > [1] > > https://activemq.apache.org/components/artemis/documentation/latest/federation-address.html#configuring-downstream-federation > > On Wed, Feb 7, 2024 at 6:23 AM Devriendt, Erik > <erik.devrie...@siemens.com.invalid> wrote: > > > I tried to set up a small Hub-Spoke topology of 3 Artemis brokers. Each > on > > a different machine, and expected to be able to configure address > > federation. > > I have 3 brokers: A, B and C. If I configure them in a full mesh > topology, > > address federation works, that is, a consumer on any of the broker > machines > > receives messages from any producer on any of the broker machines. > > However, if I configure them as A – B – C, where A-B and B-C have > > symmetrical connections, a consumer on A does not receive messages from a > > producer on C. > > The topic on which producer and consumer work, is created dynamically (so > > not in the broker.xml files) by the consumer or producer. > > > > The examples of the Artemis software only contains examples of full mesh > > federations. Are there any examples available on the internet of a > > federation with hub-spoke topology? > > Or is it not possible to use a hup-spoke topology for federation? > > > > > >
