activemq-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From alanmc <ala...@alum.mit.edu>
Subject RE: Key CMS (ActiveMQ-CPP) Features Missing. Status?
Date Fri, 27 Jun 2008 03:43:19 GMT

Thanks Tim,
Looking over things it seems like establishing a network of brokers is
orthogonal to the transport specified by the client.  A client can specify
one or many (a static list via "static:" or a randomized list via
"failover:") brokers to connect to and the fact that that broker may be
forwarding messages is completely transparent.   Is my understanding of that
correct?  If so it seems like implementing a "Failover" protocol for the C++
client would allow it to take full advantage of a network of brokers. 
Poking through the codebase it seems like the C++ doesn't support "static:"
either, so a start might be to add support for composite transports.  

I'll try and see if we have the resources to contribute.

-Alan


tabish121 wrote:
> 
> The missing features are things that would be nice to add, but so far
> there has not been enough time for us to do so, we'd definitely welcome
> contributions to the project.  
> 
> There is currently an issue for creating a Failover Transport but so far
> there is nobody working on it.
> http://issues.apache.org/activemq/secure/IssueNavigator.jspa?reset=true&
> mode=hide&sorter/order=DESC&sorter/field=priority&resolution=-1&pid=1100
> 0&fixfor=11866
> 
> For discovery I'd imagine that we'd need to add a UDP transport and the
> necessary plumbing for the discovery portion.  You could create an issue
> in Jira to add this if you'd like, but again with limited resources the
> fastest way to get this in would be for someone to step up and
> contribute it.
> 
> Regards
> Tim.
> 
> 
> 

-- 
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Key-CMS-%28ActiveMQ-CPP%29-Features-Missing.--Status--tp18139247p18147637.html
Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.


Mime
View raw message