activemq-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From facboy <>
Subject Re: [Spam: 5.0] daft question(s) about network of brokers
Date Thu, 15 Mar 2007 09:52:51 GMT

hmm...i also started getting errors of this nature:

20:49:48,437 INFO  [DemandForwardingBridge] Network connection between
vm://jboss-2#8 and tcp://localhost/ shutdown due to a local
javax.jms.JMSException: Durable consumer is in use for client:
NC_jboss-1_inboundjboss-2 and subscriptionName: jboss-2_topic.testTopic

which i wasn't getting before.

facboy wrote:
> how do i embed the broker without specifying a broker name?  the embedded
> broker always has a brokername = hostname, doesn't it?  if i use 'vm://'
> then it doesn't seem to embed the broker properly, my MDBs don't read the
> destinations any more.
> am i even configuring this correctly?  i want a 'network' of jboss
> instances so that I can send a message to a topic with a multicast (or
> rendezvous) broker url, and an mdb on each jboss instance listening to the
> topic will see the message.  does that make sense?
> it seemed to work correctly earlier today, but now it goes into some
> infinite loop of bouncing messages back and forth between the brokers.
> James.Strachan wrote:
>> On 3/15/07, facboy <> wrote:
>>> I'm trying to setup a network of brokers here...currently running 2
>>> instances
>>> of jboss with ActiveMQ embedded.  both have virtually the same
>>> configuration
>>> (including the same brokerName).
>> Broker's names are intended to be unique. Its better to not specify
>> one if you're not gonna give them unique names (then it'll
>> auto-generate one).
>>>  if i configure the brokers for multicast
>>> discovery and send a message to a topic on one of the brokers, the other
>>> doesn't see it.  if i configure the brokers for rendezvous discovery,
>>> then
>>> both can see the message on the topic.
>>> so,
>>> (1) is this because the multicast discovery agent is 'filtering out'
>>> broadcasts that have the same broker name as itself, because it thinks
>>> they
>>> are from itself?
>> I think so yes
>>> (2) is there a way around this, apart from manually changing all the
>>> broker
>>> names to be different?
>> Don't specify a broker name
>>> (3) is there a downside to using rendezvous instead of multicast (or
>>> vice
>>> versa)
>> The only real downside is another jar dependency and not being able to
>> change the multicast address (so there's a chance of clashing with
>> other rendezvous stuff)
>> -- 
>> James
>> -------

View this message in context:
Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailing list archive at

View raw message