activemq-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Gary Tully <>
Subject Re: Topic consumers are lost in a cyclic network
Date Tue, 20 Nov 2012 10:58:22 GMT
That does look like strange behavior. I think you should reopen AMQ-2327
with your test case. There may be a better way to resolve that issue that
does not introduce ordering dependencies. The test case attached to AMQ-2327
is the best focus to understand the original use case but I think this may
be a tricky one to sort out.
We will try and get to the bottom of this for the 5.8 release.

On 19 November 2012 21:28, Guerrero <> wrote:

> I am using activemq-core-5.7.0.
> We are using broker-to-broker communications with conduit subscriptions to
> reduce redundant messaging. We have a top-tier coordinating server, call it
> broker A. We have two routing servers that each connect to A, call them
> broker B and broker C.  We have remote applications that connect to both B
> and C for redundancy, and client applications that connect to only one of B
> or C. We only use topic messages for all communications between nodes.
> <>
> Normally, all is well. However, we noticed some problems in the remaining
> network when nodes were lost.  We were able to find steps to recreate the
> problem as follows. Start the nodes in the order A, B, C, Remote, Client1,
> Client2.  Stop node C.  At this point, some of the consumers from the
> Remote
> were lost from Client1, while others remained. If we send a message from
> Client1 on one of the topics that was lost, it doesn't leave the local
> broker.
> Tracing into the source of the network bridge, I suspected that
> ConduitBridge.checkPaths was preventing one of the consumer paths from
> being
> added to the list. I've attached a unit test,
> <>
> , that uses JUnit, EasyMock, and activemq, that shows how messages may stop
> forwarding depending on the order the consumers are added and removed from
> the network bridge.
> When I comment out the check for checkPaths, my test and our application
> seem to work.  However, ThreeBrokerQueueNetworkTest.testDuplicateQueueSubs
> fails. I traced back the addition of checkPaths as a fix for  AMQ-2327
> <>  , but cannot understand
> why duplicate paths would be suppressed like this, when there is a flag to
> suppress duplicate subscriptions for topics and queues and this is checked
> elsewhere.
> Can anyone add any insights into why checkPaths exists, or what could be
> wrong with the attached test case for addAndRemoveSameOrder()?
> --
> View this message in context:
> Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailing list archive at


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