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 christian.posta@gmail.com
 designates 209.85.223.174 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: 
 <CAJ+uOocaxiV_x1wH1yWiYAqHrjCxVQ8v3DAvuAgM2b8GwbCY3g@mail.gmail.com>
References: 
 <CAJ+uOocaxiV_x1wH1yWiYAqHrjCxVQ8v3DAvuAgM2b8GwbCY3g@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2013 06:21:59 -0700
Message-ID: 
 <CAKS7T5MZmdYLtqAjU-q98t9x2+sr+tiLBdQtLOx5ereR-OtHLg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: failover transport connect
From: Christian Posta <christian.posta@gmail.com>
To: "users@activemq.apache.org" <users@activemq.apache.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=14dae93408dd648bbe04d3e076c5

--14dae93408dd648bbe04d3e076c5
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

Is your broker (mq-1) failing?


On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 9:24 PM, Nate Faerber <nate@itsoninc.com> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I have two ActiveMQ server configured as network of brokers and my clients
> with this connect string:
>
>
> failover:(tcp://mq1-master:61616,tcp://mq2-master:61616)?randomize=false&backup=true&maxReconnectDelay=10000
>
> It seems that every time we create a JMS message using Spring Framework,
> the ActiveMQ connection, our clients try the primary then fail to the
> secondary.  The large (large) majority of messages go through the second
> ActiveMQ server.  This seems like an inefficiency or at least does not
> behave like I would expect it to.  Am I misunderstanding the configuration
> here?
>
> 2013-01-21 20:10:27,604 INFO
>  [org.apache.activemq.transport.failover.FailoverTransport][ActiveMQ
> Task-1] [FailoverTransport.java:1030] Successfully connected to
> tcp://mq1-master:61616
> 2013-01-21 20:10:27,610 INFO
>  [org.apache.activemq.transport.failover.FailoverTransport][ActiveMQ
> Task-1] [FailoverTransport.java:1032] Successfully reconnected to
> tcp://mq2-master:61616
>
> My servers have this config:
>
>         <transportConnectors>
>             <transportConnector
>                 name="${broker.transport.client.name}"
>                 uri="${broker.transport.client.uri}"
>                 updateClusterClients="true"
>                 updateClusterClientsOnRemove="true"
>                 rebalanceClusterClients="true" />
>
>             <transportConnector
>                 name="${broker.transport.network.name}"
>                 uri="${broker.transport.network.uri}" />
>         </transportConnectors>
>
> Thoughts appreciated.
>
> thanks,
> -nate
>


-- 
*Christian Posta*
http://www.christianposta.com/blog
twitter: @christianposta

--14dae93408dd648bbe04d3e076c5--