> With this default behaviour, N subscriptions on a remote broker look like > a single subscription to the networked broker. >
This is something we desire. For instance, A.appId is the central broker, and A.B.appId, A.B.C.appId, and A.B.D.appId are all connected to A.appId. When A.B.D.appId send a heartbeat, it should only need to send a single message over the network to A.appId, which in turn forwards the message to A.B.appId. If I turn off conduit subscriptions, won't this mean that A.B.D.appId will need to send two messages for the single heartbeat? Which in turn will be seen as duplicates on A.appId, and only one will be forwarded to A.B.appId. This may not sound like a lot, but once we have a fair number of nodes, this will be sending an awful lot of duplicate and ignored messages. I think we do want subscriptions to be consolidated, but I don't believe "A.>" should be consolidated as the same as "A.*" since it may receive a wider range of possible topics... -- View this message in context: http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/Wildcards-may-block-a-prefix-in-a-network-of-brokers-tp4654420p4654471.html Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
