Check what James said about using Master/Slave to prevent messages being stuck on one broker too long in the event one of the brokers in your Active-Active NoB goes down.
Also make sure that messages can make it back to their originating broker if there are no consumers with the ConditionalNetworkBridgeFilter: http://activemq.apache.org/networks-of-brokers.html If you're still skeptical about the routingYou can check both brokers like this: <route> <from uri="activemq:queue:Queue1"/> <from uri="activemq2:queue:Queue1"/> <bean ref="MyBean" method="evaluate"/> <to uri="direct:processit"/> </route> On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 10:21 AM, dunnlow <dunn...@yahoo.com> wrote: > Thanks Reji, I understand. My fear with SEDA is that I have a pretty high > msg flow at times and if my app goes down and there are messages on the > SEDA > queue (that is, pulled off of various jms brokers/queues and waiting on a > SEDA queue) the msgs will be lost. But I wonder, can a transaction work > across that? For example, in a transaction, pull the msgs off of three > different activemq instances and place in SEDA queue, but only consume one > of the msgs from SEDA and then shut down the system. Can the transaction > be > maintained so that the two unconsumed msgs roll back to their respective > brokers/queues? I feel some more testing coming on... :) Any thought? > Thanks again, -J > > > > -- > View this message in context: > http://camel.465427.n5.nabble.com/Best-way-to-consuming-same-queue-from-two-brokers-tp5742100p5742134.html > Sent from the Camel - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > -- *Christian Posta* http://www.christianposta.com/blog twitter: @christianposta
