I'm not entirely sure if the configuration you want is possible. You might try using the "group-name" element in the "master" or "slave" element of "colocated." Only servers with the same group-name will pair together.
Aside from that I would actually recommend against using colocated brokers. The original use-case for this functionality was very early cloud infrastructure where durable, attached storage was not readily available. However, since then most (if not all) cloud environments support durable storage separate from the broker so that if the broker goes down a new, identical broker can be spun-up relatively quickly and attached to the same storage. This provides functional high availability without the need for any idle backups or replication of any kind which functionally nullifies this feature. Additionally, it turns out that (surprise!) configuring & running multiple brokers in the same JVM is difficult and error-prone not to mention the complication of dynamically coordinating the acquisition of backups in a running cluster and protecting against split-brain. Justin On Thu, Mar 23, 2023 at 7:37 AM Roy Cohen <roy_co...@hotmail.com> wrote: > Hello everyone > > We have a setup of three Artemis brokers (very old version don’t ask :)) > > We would like to configure the co located backups such that the backups > are sent in this order: > > Broker01 -> Broker02 > Broker02 -> Broker03 > Broker03 -> Broker01 > > > I was reading on co located backups here: > https://activemq.apache.org/components/artemis/documentation/1.0.0/ha.html > however not sure I fully understand how to configure the xml section to > achieve that. > > Shall I add excludes in each broker, i.e. > > <colocated> > <excludes> > <connector-ref>...</connector-ref> > </excludes> > > Any help would be appreciated. > > Many thanks in advance ! > > >
