From users-return-27431-apmail-activemq-users-archive=activemq.apache.org@activemq.apache.org Mon May 9 10:18:01 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: apmail-activemq-users-archive@www.apache.org Delivered-To: apmail-activemq-users-archive@www.apache.org Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 5E65A463F for ; Mon, 9 May 2011 10:18:01 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 49777 invoked by uid 500); 9 May 2011 10:18:00 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-activemq-users-archive@activemq.apache.org Received: (qmail 49750 invoked by uid 500); 9 May 2011 10:18:00 -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 49742 invoked by uid 99); 9 May 2011 10:18:00 -0000 Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (192.87.106.230) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 09 May 2011 10:18:00 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.6 required=5.0 tests=FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,RFC_ABUSE_POST,SPF_PASS,T_TO_NO_BRKTS_FREEMAIL,URI_HEX X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of gary.tully@gmail.com designates 209.85.210.43 as permitted sender) Received: from [209.85.210.43] (HELO mail-pz0-f43.google.com) (209.85.210.43) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 09 May 2011 10:17:55 +0000 Received: by pzk1 with SMTP id 1so3082081pzk.2 for ; Mon, 09 May 2011 03:17:33 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; bh=2FIGJXCIAjQ92tEQrPVqU0axIC6JRSHP22MMJZu5pcg=; b=bODgqIbZApir1hpX5vld8U8FH4r2cRNGFq8K00RqY0pRwEdFHvgw8VHBv+O458iyz7 kQbTbmxiVTaxMBs9ePrzgEr7Sgks9KuR8QKk4zdnE38nszx+QT3+JeDs8kC9dw7k9yE0 pEzZNHsIzFh/xd8m7Ym1xTcBs/kjOT2bPLG2c= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; b=Hr7+R3NxdT6ma2k2d914LdMlt+uPZkq+wG0ZW1OndLFh0rnMeyhcwipm3X3mtJCw5I mUCiJzNCK6lMs2hrvE28+kAtbj14lmQClWC/8jBPFbu5Oc8VC9QXBC9QI9giQcCue7WZ sOI0TzKNOfiYVvCx5cbY1ww5NOYqOIj0fbjqM= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.143.24.17 with SMTP id b17mr3732393wfj.269.1304936253527; Mon, 09 May 2011 03:17:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.142.222.11 with HTTP; Mon, 9 May 2011 03:17:33 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <1304932730827-3508760.post@n4.nabble.com> References: <1304764154421-3505304.post@n4.nabble.com> <1304932730827-3508760.post@n4.nabble.com> Date: Mon, 9 May 2011 11:17:33 +0100 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Using queue to support disconnected clients From: Gary Tully To: users@activemq.apache.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org hmm, that is an interesting use case, a concentrator. At the moment all destinations are global so the will map one to one across the network. I don' think there is a way to configure a concentrator out of the box but all of the component bits are there so you should be able to make it work with a bit of customisation. You would need to have the client forwarding bridge contain a statically included composite destination, using a comma separated list of client q destinations. This will subscribe to and shunt all of the messages from client q's to the server side, however the target destination will need to be replaced to implement the concentrator. On the server side, you will need a broker plugin that intercepts the send operation and maps the X client q destinations to the shared q. An alternative approach would be to implement the mapping in the client broker (in configuration) via virtual destinations, so you configure all of the client destinations to internally forward to a shared queue and then propagate just that shared queue through the network. If there is no value in the client queue destinations, you could put in a broker plugin on the client that replaces the destinations at that point an be done with it. So you have a few options, depending on your exact use case, the plugin architecture gives you complete control really. On 9 May 2011 10:18, GuyPardon wrote: > Thanks, > > Follow-up question: assuming there are many client queues: is it possible to > setup this 'forwarding' mechanism between brokers so that many client queues > are 'forwarding' to a single, shared server-side queue? > > Guy > > -- > View this message in context: http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/Using-queue-to-support-disconnected-clients-tp3505304p3508760.html > Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > -- http://blog.garytully.com http://fusesource.com