Mailing-List: contact users-help@activemq.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: users@activemq.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of gaurav.cs.sharma@gmail.com
 designates 209.85.160.43 as permitted sender)
Subject: Re: Routing in ActiveMQ in distributed environment
References: <1348142430920-4656754.post@n4.nabble.com>
 <43E96943-05A4-4D51-8A60-C770469BF1E9@gmail.com>
 <1348211534913-4656790.post@n4.nabble.com>
From: Gaurav Sharma <gaurav.cs.sharma@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset=us-ascii
In-Reply-To: <1348211534913-4656790.post@n4.nabble.com>
Message-Id: <377F2ADF-CA1C-454A-B396-3F6E0D303BF9@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 21 Sep 2012 07:49:26 -0700
To: "users@activemq.apache.org" <users@activemq.apache.org>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0)

So, are A, B, C brokers on three separate JVM's and looks like (from your de=
scription) that their producers are local on the same machine? By "instances=
", you do mean brokers, right?

With this 3 broker config, what use case are you trying to solve by routing m=
essage from A to B or C? Like you said, if P is local to A, it is wasteful f=
or it to publish to B or C. Also, are your brokers geographically separated a=
nd remote from each other?

On Sep 21, 2012, at 0:12, madhavb <bhamidipatimadhav@gmail.com> wrote:

> Gaurav,
>=20
> What I mean here is I have 3 instances of activeMQs at location A, B and C=

> respectively, I have a producer bean 'P' in location A which locally place=
s
> the messages in AMQ instance @A, locally because I relieve(lessen) the
> headache of connection maintenance and probability of message loss in 'P' i=
f
> I were to connect to AMQ instances B or C remotely.
>=20
> regards,
> Madhav
>=20
>=20
>=20
> --
> View this message in context: http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/Routin=
g-in-ActiveMQ-in-distributed-environment-tp4656754p4656790.html
> Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.