Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-activemq-users-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 99939 invoked from network); 17 Aug 2007 21:19:37 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.2) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 17 Aug 2007 21:19:37 -0000 Received: (qmail 85159 invoked by uid 500); 17 Aug 2007 21:19:34 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-activemq-users-archive@activemq.apache.org Received: (qmail 85134 invoked by uid 500); 17 Aug 2007 21:19:34 -0000 Mailing-List: contact users-help@activemq.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: users@activemq.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list users@activemq.apache.org Received: (qmail 85125 invoked by uid 99); 17 Aug 2007 21:19:34 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (140.211.11.136) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 17 Aug 2007 14:19:34 -0700 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=3.5 required=10.0 tests=DNS_FROM_OPENWHOIS,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS,URIBL_RHS_DOB,WHOIS_MYPRIVREG X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of lists@nabble.com designates 216.139.236.158 as permitted sender) Received: from [216.139.236.158] (HELO kuber.nabble.com) (216.139.236.158) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 17 Aug 2007 21:19:29 +0000 Received: from isper.nabble.com ([192.168.236.156]) by kuber.nabble.com with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1IM9Dp-0007Hy-Ak for users@activemq.apache.org; Fri, 17 Aug 2007 14:19:09 -0700 Message-ID: <12207396.post@talk.nabble.com> Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2007 14:19:09 -0700 (PDT) From: j0llyr0g3r To: users@activemq.apache.org Subject: Load-Balancing with a single broker across clusters MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Nabble-From: timo.roessner@wincor-nixdorf.com X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org Hi folks, i used the forum's search function and found some similar threads but now i am more confused than before.....:-) Imagine the following situation: - some producers which all send messages to the same broker - this broker acts only as a load-balancer - between 2 clusters of brokers (each cluster consisting of 2 brokers with shared memory) - some consumers getting messages from the clusters To illustrate this (i know i really suck at ascii-art.....): producer \ __________ cluster_1 --> consumer \_______ / _______ loadbalancer (single broker) \ / \_________ producer / cluster_2 --> consumer What I have so far: - The producers and consumers - the 2 clusters - the single broker in the middle, but without load-balancing functionalities So i simply connected the single broker to the cluster using a networkConnector with an URI-list containing the 2 cluster-URIs. Now i got two questions: 1. Is there a way to tell the single broker in the middle to act as a load-balancer? 2. Is there a way to check if this really works, meaning that the message-load is evenly distributed among the clusters? Thx for any help guys.... P.S. If one responsible for the amq-documentation reads this: The mentioned example in the documentation: http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/activemq/trunk/activemq-core/src/test/resources/org/apache/activemq/broker/ft/slave2.xml is slightly wrong, instead of it should be Can be pretty confusing if you are a newbie and try the example only to receive strange error messages....:-) -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Load-Balancing-with-a-single-broker-across-clusters-tf4288219s2354.html#a12207396 Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.