activemq-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Justin Bertram <jbert...@apache.org>
Subject Re: [ARTEMIS 2.4.0] JMS Client Java 7
Date Wed, 07 Feb 2018 15:12:27 GMT
 > I have created the queue using the <queue> element in the broker.xml.
And for some reason it created "Multicast" routing. Does it make any sense?

Yes, that makes sense.  The legacy <queue> element in <queues> does not
support any way to specify a routing-type so it just defaults to multicast
which was the default routing semantic in previous versions of Artemis.

> Is the <queue> depricated in favour of the <address> element?

The <queues> element (and everything in it) is deprecated in favor of
<addresses>.


Justin

On Tue, Feb 6, 2018 at 10:44 AM, Premik <premysl.srubar@post.cz> wrote:

> Thanks.
> I finally managed to get it working on 2.4.0. I didn't even had to add that
> two casePrefix acceptor parameters. It was indeed related to the
> "queue.jms"
> prefix. But not only that.
>
> It confused me the messages have header.address =  "jms.queue.test". But
> the
> broker is expecting just an "test" address to be created. Not
> "jms.queue.test".
>
> But that was not the only thing. I have created the queue using the <queue>
> element in the broker.xml. And for some reason it created "Multicast"
> routing. Does it make any sense? Is the <queue> depricated in favour of the
> <address> element? Because when I have  "test" -> multicast -> "test" the
> messages with "jms.queue.test" in the header stil go DLQ.
>
>
>
> --
> Sent from: http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/ActiveMQ-User-
> f2341805.html
>

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