A broker automatically retries connections to remote brokers. Clients will also automatically retry connections to brokers, but they need to use the 'failover' transport.
Joe www.ttmsolutions.com dlaidlaw wrote: > > > OK, so JMS Bridges are not the recommended solution. And I will look at > camel and how robust I can make it. But in the mean time, what about a > network of brokers? > > The broker network stuff also moves messages between brokers. In my case > they will all be ActiveMQ brokers so no issue about foreign broker > connections. I could configure the network of brokers to only replicate > certain queues in one direction. > > But is this robust? Will it recover from connection drops when a remote > broker is stopped and restarted? Or how about at local broker startup > time, if the remote broker is not up at the time will the connection keep > trying in the background, waiting for the remote broker to startup? > > Or is this not a recommended solution as well? > > Thanks for your time on this! > -Don > > > rajdavies wrote: >> >> >> On 20 Jun 2008, at 16:25, dlaidlaw wrote: >> >>> >>> I was looking at the source code for JMS Bridges to see how robust the >>> connections would be. Would they auto-recover, retry delivery, were >>> they >>> transacted, etc. I noticed some code in there that seemed to be >>> aimed at >>> having retry behavior but no loop for a retry. >>> >>> Look at the org.apache.activemq.network.jms.DestinationBridge class, >>> the >>> onMessage method. A local method variable called attempt is created >>> and >>> initialized to 0. There is also a test against maximumRetries, but >>> there are >>> no loops in the code to actually have another attempt. Any idea how >>> a second >>> attempt could ever happen? I can't see it. >>> >>> Has anyone ever done an implementation using transactions to ensure >>> the >>> consume/send pair commits as a unit? It would be possible here for >>> the send >>> to succeed and the acknowledge to fail resulting in duplicates being >>> sent >>> eventually. >>> >>> Thanks >>> -Don >>> -- >>> View this message in context: >>> http://www.nabble.com/JMS-Bridge-retries-and-transactions-tp18031980p18031980.html >>> Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. >>> >> >> Hi Don - the recommended approach for JMS bridges is to now use Camel >> - see http://activemq.apache.org/camel/jms.html >> >> >> >> >> cheers, >> >> Rob >> >> http://open.iona.com/products/enterprise-activemq >> http://rajdavies.blogspot.com/ >> >> >> >> >> >> > > -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/JMS-Bridge-retries-and-transactions-tp18031980p18035458.html Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
