strict message ordering is always going to be at odds with performance. what you're trying to do might be better accomplished with:
http://activemq.apache.org/exclusive-consumer.html On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 4:05 PM, MB <[email protected]> wrote: > After reading ActiveMQ Message Groups feature > (http://activemq.apache.org/message-groups.html), I'm a little confused > about how it works in a clustered environment. > > The basic premise as far as I can see is that messages of a particular type > (defined by the JMSXGroupID, set in a message) are all sent to a specific > consumer. > > If I have 2 clients/consumers that I want to be connected to the broker to > provide both resiliency and performance, using message groups means, all > messages of a certain type will be pinned to one of the two consumers. If > that consumer goes down, messages of that type will then be pinned to > another consumer. Whilst this satisfies the resiliency criteria, this > creates redundancy, in that one consumer is doing nothing most of the time > & > thus not helping to improve performance. > > Does this mean when choosing Message Groups, you have to be aware that you > are sacrificing performance by being able to load balance a broker across > multiple consumers for the benefit of providing guaranteed processing order > of messages of a particular type? > > > > -- > View this message in context: > http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/Active-MQ-Message-Groups-tp4669686.html > Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > -- *Christian Posta* http://www.christianposta.com/blog twitter: @christianposta
