activemq-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Gary Tully <gary.tu...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: WebSphere MQ veteran new to ActiveMQ questions
Date Fri, 23 Oct 2009 12:10:53 GMT
I think the brokerName in the network configuration is useful when there is
more than one bridge configured on a broker. It allows the two
networkConnectors to be differentiated. When a single network connector is
configured, the default "localhost" value (so leaving it out) will suffice.

w.r.t naming your brokers, there are no real issues that I can think of and
hence no hard recommendations. If all spoke brokers share the same name it
may just be more difficult to parse/make sense of the logs

With hub and spoke and duplex networkConnectors, the auto created (duplex)
network connector will pick up its broker name from the remote peer.

2009/10/23 Fred Moore <fred.moore77@gmail.com>

> Hi Rob,
>
> many thanks for the very prompt and comprehensive answer, which encourages
> me to venture into a second round of questions :-) ...
>
>
> Hi Folks,
>
> 1\ Can someone shed some light on the actual role of the brokerName in a
> network of brokers scenario? (by reading the docs it looks like it does not
> play much of a role)
>
> 2\ Are there recommendations/best practices for naming brokers in a network
> (where some nodes may host more than one broker)?
>
> 3\ Can we have a hub&spoke topology where all spokes have the same
> brokerName? (which would remove the naming headache completely)
>
> Thanks in advance.
> Cheers,
> F.
>



-- 
http://blog.garytully.com

Open Source Integration
http://fusesource.com

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message