See response inline:
On Sep 16, 2013, at 3:31 AM, NimbusParc [via Qpid]
<ml-node+s2158936n7598194...@n2.nabble.com> wrote:
> Just now i tried this one. Everything works fine for me.
> As Ted Ross wrote...
>
> 1) Create exchanges
> 2) Create dynamic routes
> 3) Create queues and bindings
I did this, in this order.
>
>
> After this, just check if all the links are operational or not.
All nodes report links are operational.
A:
Host Port Transport Durable State Last Error
=============================================================================
10.10.10.10 5672 tcp Y Operational
B:
Host Port Transport Durable State Last Error
=============================================================================
10.10.10.1 5672 tcp Y Operational
10.10.10.20 5672 tcp Y Operational
C:
Host Port Transport Durable State Last Error
=============================================================================
10.10.10.10 5672 tcp Y Operational Closed by peer
> Then, check in route map that the routes are in bi-directional or not.
Previously, route map didn't work because the nodes were on segments that could
not talk to each other. I've changed this for testing and they now report that
all of the links are bidirectional except to localhost.. does that make any
sense? Thats not a route I am declaring, it is being auto created somehow?
On A:
Finding Linked Brokers:
localhost:5672... Ok
10.10.10.10:5672... Ok
10.10.10.1:5672... Ok
10.10.10.20:5672... Ok
Dynamic Routes:
Exchange test-topic:
10.10.10.10:5672 => localhost:5672
10.10.10.10:5672 <=> 10.10.10.1:5672
10.10.10.20:5672 <=> 10.10.10.10:5672
Static Routes:
none found
> Then check the bindings in between the Exchanges and Queues.
Am I supposed to see a binding on A for the queue on C that I want to send to?
I don't have such a binding and I think this is the root of the problem.
Specifically, on A I have:
Exchange 'test-topic' (topic)
bind [A] => b8037cdc-97e2-49fc-9c07-d1a1fb2c57dc:0.0
bind [] => A
bind [] =>
qpid.bridge_queue_qpid.tcp:10.10.10.1:5672!test-topic!test-topic!_d7ea0855-a1db-451a-bb72-ec61814db3ee
{u'qpid.replicate': u'none', u'qpid.fed.origin':
u'd7ea0855-a1db-451a-bb72-ec61814db3ee', u'qpid.fed.op': u'', u'qpid.fed.tags':
u'd7ea0855-a1db-451a-bb72-ec61814db3ee'}
bind [B] =>
qpid.bridge_queue_qpid.tcp:10.10.10.1:5672!test-topic!test-topic!_d7ea0855-a1db-451a-bb72-ec61814db3ee
{u'qpid.replicate': u'none', u'qpid.fed.origin':
u'd7ea0855-a1db-451a-bb72-ec61814db3ee', u'qpid.fed.op': u'', u'qpid.fed.tags':
u'd7ea0855-a1db-451a-bb72-ec61814db3ee'}
What I don't see is something like…
bind [C] => qpid.bridge_queue_qpid.tcp:…….
What does qpid-config exchanges -r look like for you?
> Then, test by using "spout" and "drain" examples.
Same result, messages from A to b work fine but messages to c result in a
dropped message.
Thanks,
-Andrew
>
> Now, you can send messages from A to B, B to C and A to C also. I Think you
> may be doing mistake in the bindings.
> (i.e) You should bind the queue to the exchange used in dynamic routing. And
> separately bind to the same exchange name in another brokers with respected
> queues.
> Try freshly by restarting brokers ( take care of the Back up, etc,.) and
> follow the sequence. Still if you struggle with the same problem, i'll post
> my step-by-step results.
> All the best
> bacon wrote
> The changes seem to be in what exchange routes end up being created however
> messages are still not making it. Specifically, ./qpid-config exchanges -r
> now looks like this:
>
>
> Exchange '' (direct)
> bind [050aed7f-31c5-4018-ab99-f248b1789573:0.0] =>
> 050aed7f-31c5-4018-ab99-f248b1789573:0.0
> bind [B] => B
> bind
> [qpid.bridge_queue_qpid.tcp:192.168.0.1:5672!test-fanout!test-fanout!_d7ea0855-a1db-451a-bb72-ec61814db3ee]
> =>
> qpid.bridge_queue_qpid.tcp:192.168.0.1:5672!test-fanout!test-fanout!_d7ea0855-a1db-451a-bb72-ec61814db3ee
>
> bind
> [qpid.bridge_queue_qpid.tcp:192.168.1.2:5672!test-fanout!test-fanout!_d7ea0855-a1db-451a-bb72-ec61814db3ee]
> =>
> qpid.bridge_queue_qpid.tcp:192.168.1.2:5672!test-fanout!test-fanout!_d7ea0855-a1db-451a-bb72-ec61814db3ee
>
> Exchange 'amq.direct' (direct)
> Exchange 'amq.fanout' (fanout)
> Exchange 'amq.match' (headers)
> Exchange 'amq.topic' (topic)
> Exchange 'test-fanout' (fanout)
> bind [] => B
> bind [] =>
> qpid.bridge_queue_qpid.tcp:192.168.0.1:5672!test-fanout!test-fanout!_d7ea0855-a1db-451a-bb72-ec61814db3ee
> {u'qpid.replicate': u'none', u'qpid.fed.origin':
> u'd7ea0855-a1db-451a-bb72-ec61814db3ee', u'qpid.fed.op': u'',
> u'qpid.fed.tags': u'd7ea0855-a1db-451a-bb72-ec61814db3ee'}
> bind [] =>
> qpid.bridge_queue_qpid.tcp:192.168.1.2:5672!test-fanout!test-fanout!_d7ea0855-a1db-451a-bb72-ec61814db3ee
> {u'qpid.replicate': u'none', u'qpid.fed.origin':
> u'd7ea0855-a1db-451a-bb72-ec61814db3ee', u'qpid.fed.op': u'',
> u'qpid.fed.tags': u'd7ea0855-a1db-451a-bb72-ec61814db3ee'}
> Exchange 'qmf.default.direct' (direct)
> Exchange 'qmf.default.topic' (topic)
> bind [direct.8cd9ca02-a36d-413d-ac09-a2d5a9feb534] =>
> 050aed7f-31c5-4018-ab99-f248b1789573:0.0
> Exchange 'qpid.management' (topic)
>
>
> I really feel like I must be doing something wrong…
>
> Is there something that I can do to further debug the dynamic route exchange?
> Or perhaps I could try manually setting up static exchange routes (actually,
> I've tried that but didn't get far).
>
> -Andrew
>
>
>
>
>
> On Sep 13, 2013, at 1:33 AM, "NimbusParc [via Qpid]" <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> > -----------------bacon wrote-------------
> > > Outout of qpid-stat -e on A after trying to send a message to b and then
> > > c
> > >
> > >Exchanges
> > > exchange type dur bind msgIn msgOut msgDrop byteIn
> > > byteOut byteDrop
> > >
> > > >===========================================================================================
> > >
> > > direct 3 0 0 0 0
> > > 0 0
> > > amq.direct direct Y 0 76 76 0 34.7k
> > > 34.7k 0
> > > amq.fanout fanout Y 0 0 0 0 0
> > > 0 0
> > > amq.match headers Y 0 0 0 0 0
> > > 0 0
> > > amq.topic topic Y 0 0 0 0 0
> > > 0 0
> > > test-topic topic 2 3 2 1 12
> > > 8 4 <--- (drop is 1 after attempt to sent to c)
> > > qmf.default.direct direct 0 9 9 0 2.40k
> > > 2.40k 0
> > > qmf.default.topic topic 1 333 7 326 255k
> > > 17.2k 238k
> > > qpid.management topic 0 0 0 0 0
> > > 0 0
> >
> >
> > In the above output it is very clear in the stats of "bytesDrop".
> > >
> > >Thought: It seems that A doesn't know anything a about C or c so it drops
> > >the message... could this have something to do
> > >with using a topic exchange? Or should B be telling A what it knows about
> > >C (but isn't)?
> > >
> >
> > Try once with fanout exchange instead of topic exchange and let me know
> > whether any change will be there are not ?
> >
> > If you reply to this email, your message will be added to the discussion
> > below:
> > http://qpid.2158936.n2.nabble.com/Dynamic-routing-between-disconnected-exchanges-tp7598100p7598155.html
> > To unsubscribe from Dynamic routing between disconnected exchanges, click
> > here.
> > NAML
>
>
>
> signature.asc (858 bytes)
> <http://qpid.2158936.n2.nabble.com/attachment/7598164/0/signature.asc>
>
>
> If you reply to this email, your message will be added to the discussion
> below:
> http://qpid.2158936.n2.nabble.com/Dynamic-routing-between-disconnected-exchanges-tp7598100p7598194.html
> To unsubscribe from Dynamic routing between disconnected exchanges, click
> here.
> NAML
signature.asc (858 bytes)
<http://qpid.2158936.n2.nabble.com/attachment/7598240/0/signature.asc>
--
View this message in context:
http://qpid.2158936.n2.nabble.com/Dynamic-routing-between-disconnected-exchanges-tp7598100p7598240.html
Sent from the Apache Qpid users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
