activemq-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Marc Zampetti <>
Subject Re: Questions on Network of Brokers and high message rates
Date Wed, 05 Dec 2007 16:58:03 GMT


AMQ-816 sounds exactly like what I need. Then I could configured all of
these brokers as basically stand-alone with the consumers connected to a
sub-set or all of them, depending upon what I need. Do you know if AMQ-816
is going to be implemented, and if so, any ideas when?


James.Strachan wrote:
> On 05/12/2007, Marc Zampetti <> wrote:
>> James,
>> Yes, it sounds like the JEDI thing and the partitioning approach is what
>> I
>> need. And yes, I'm talking queues for the most part.  For the
>> partitioning,
>> is that something that AMQ, or are you talking about me having a layer in
>> front of AMQ that would do this.
> Its a pending feature request - basically a custom Transport inside
> ActiveMQ to do the partitioning.
>> In this case, instead of having one big
>> network of brokers, I would have several smaller networks of brokers?
> So a network of brokers is for store and forward; each subscription
> must be replicated across each broker so messages can be stored and
> forwarded from broker to broker. When talking about massive load, you
> generally don't wanna forward messages from one broker to another (as
> you're already overloading a single broker - you don't wanna send 2x
> or 3x the traffic due to store/forward).
> However you don't need that - what you need is producers partitioning
> (or just load balancing) across a number of brokers. i.e. its just a
> number of brokers thats all. Then ensuring that there are sufficient
> consumers connected to each broker.
> e.g. each one of your 50 producers could load balance across, day, 10
> brokers. Then each 10 broker has a 100-5000 consumers processing
> requests concurrently (depending on how fast/slow it is to process
> messages).
> -- 
> James
> -------
> Open Source Integration

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

View raw message