Ensure that you are not creating two brokers. Check the log output. Order of initialisation of your beans is important, you may want to declare some dependencies or you can explicity disable embedded broker creation in the vm url used by your connection factory with: vm://broker?create=false&waitForStart=5000
see: http://activemq.apache.org/vm-transport-reference.html in particular the note at the end. On 16 April 2010 11:32, sebge2 <sebastienger...@cyberplongeurs.be> wrote: > > Hello, > > In order to test my application (maven test), I need an embedded activeMQ > instance. I've seen that there is two ways of declaring my broker. First, > by > defining a BrokerService bean and directly configuring it. In the attached > file, you can see my spring bean. > > http://old.nabble.com/file/p28265327/messaging-embedded-bean-activemq-strategy.xml > messaging-embedded-bean-activemq-strategy.xml > > The other way described in the documentation is to do: > <bean id="broker" class="org.apache.activemq.xbean.BrokerFactoryBean"> > <property name="config" > > value="classpath:META-INF/sf-test/bootstrap/embedded-activemq/activemq.xml"/> > <property name="start" value="true"/> > </bean> > > With the traditional configuration file (I've removed jetty, and camel > routes): > http://old.nabble.com/file/p28265327/activemq.xml activemq.xml > > > My problem is that with an embedded instance, my DLQ policy is not applied. > So, poison messages are placed in ActiveMQ.DLQ instead of DLQ.<myQueue>. In > a standalone activeMQ this works as expected. Is there something to > configure to custom the default DLQ policy ? > > > Thanks for your help :) > > Sébastien > > > -- > View this message in context: > http://old.nabble.com/Embedded-ActiveMQ-configuration-tp28265327p28265327.html > Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > > -- http://blog.garytully.com Open Source Integration http://fusesource.com
