On 4/5/06, Adrian Co <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi, > > To try and answer some of your questions: > > Naby wrote:
[snip]] > >c) How often does it happen that a broker fails/dies forever? > > > > > I can't say really depends on a lot of factors I think. :-) Agreed. Its probably most common that just sockets go bad so that the client with try to reconnect again. Brokers failing or being killed is quite rare but can happen. > >Let me ask another question. > >We are running web clients. There is a time lack between the start of these > >clients and the registration to the topics but we want the clients to get > >the messages which are published within this time, but not messages > >published before the start. > >What do you think is a good technic/configuration to solve this problem? > > > > > I don't know if this would work for you, but AMQ 4.x has a > TimedSubscriptionRecoveryPolicy, which basically allows you to specify > how long messages should be cached in memory before being discarded. If > you use this, you should also make your consumers retroactive. The subscription recovery policy allows you to go back in time for non-durable topic subscriptions http://activemq.org/Subscription+Recovery+Policy (for durable topic subscriptions clearly this is not really necessary). It does take the broker a little while to realise a socket is dead and close down the current subscriptions; there is a chance the client could reconnect in time; we could maybe do a better job at realising clients are down and waiting long enough before really discarding the connection/subscription/messages. Though the subscription recovery mechanism should act as a catch-all which can deal with clients moving from one broker to another and still avoiding missing any messages -- James ------- http://radio.weblogs.com/0112098/
