Hi Cyril, no Qpid Broker-J does not support QMF. Qpid Broker-J does support management over AMQP using the draft AMQP Management specification, whereby you send messages to a node "$management" to perform management operations. Since the AMQP spec is in draft this is not yet documented as the mechanism is likely to change as the AMQP technical committee refines the draft.
-- Rob On 15 March 2018 at 14:22, Cyril Micoud <[email protected]> wrote: > Is it QMF available/compatible with Qpid Broker-J 7.0.x and Qpid JMS > 0.30.0 ? If yes, how to unable it? > > Cyril > > -----Message d'origine----- > De : Cyril Micoud <[email protected]> > Envoyé : jeudi 15 mars 2018 10:34 > À : [email protected] > Objet : RE: Qpid JMS 0.30.0 or Qpid Proton-J 0.26.0 to point-to-point > message exchange? > > Hi Robbie, > > Thanks for your answer, I agree with you on the "dynamicQueues/" usage... > > But about the VirtualHost/Exchange/Queue management, what is the best way > with Qpid Broker-J 7.0.x? REST api or JMS message or any other solution? > > Cyril > > -----Message d'origine----- > De : Robbie Gemmell <[email protected]> Envoyé : mercredi 14 mars > 2018 18:55 À : [email protected] Objet : Re: Qpid JMS 0.30.0 or Qpid > Proton-J 0.26.0 to point-to-point message exchange? > > If you are 'reloading' an InitialContext to add new JNDI config, then > depending on how you do that exactly I'd guess your application is coupled > to either the syntax of the properties it uses or maybe just the > implementation class. In either case, you could as well use > session.createQueue(<name>) etc to create the destination objects instead, > its no more provider-specific behaviour than the former. > > The context can actually also create Queue/Topic objects without > predefined config using the prefixes "dynamicQueues/" or "dynamicTopics/" > on the lookup, e.g looking up "dynamicQueues/myQueue" > will give you a Queue destination object for "myQueue". > > Robbie > > On 14 March 2018 at 17:29, Cyril Micoud <[email protected]> wrote: > > We use Qpid Broker-J 7.0.x... > > > > We have build a REST service based on Retrofit but it is very coupling > with POJO structure (we use Custom POJO instead of Map<String, Object> > return by REST api due to the simplicity to understand which object we > manipulate). > > After see management via JMS message, I think to me it is pobably the > best way to manage Broker configuration... > > > > But, for the moment, I am not able to use a queue or topic if it is not > already present in JDNI properties (InitialContext). > > After each REST creation, I must reload the InitialContext with the new > queue... > > > > Perhaps, vertx-proton was better in that case... > > > > Best regards > > > > Cyril > > > > -----Message d'origine----- > > De : Rob Godfrey <[email protected]> Envoyé : mercredi 14 mars > > 2018 17:19 À : [email protected] Objet : Re: Qpid JMS 0.30.0 or > > Qpid Proton-J 0.26.0 to point-to-point message exchange? > > > > On 14 March 2018 at 17:13, Cyril Micoud <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > >> Thanks Gordon and Robbie for your answers. > >> > >> I have found the vertx-proton just few second before your response... > >> it is very simple and I think we are going to use it to provide a > >> light and simple server on our "client" java side. > >> > >> About JMS, I have seen a link (but where?) to manage VirtualHost, > >> Exchange and Queue directly via message, it is always possible with > >> Qpid JMS 0.30.0 or our only way is the REST api? > >> > >> > > Which broker are you using? Unfortunately there is not yet a > standardised way to manage different brokers. > > > > -- Rob > > > > > >> Thanks again a ot by advance, > >> Best regards, > >> > >> Cyril > >> > >> > >> -----Message d'origine----- > >> De : Gordon Sim <[email protected]> > >> Envoyé : mercredi 14 mars 2018 14:20 > >> À : [email protected] > >> Objet : Re: Qpid JMS 0.30.0 or Qpid Proton-J 0.26.0 to point-to-point > >> message exchange? > >> > >> On 14/03/18 12:19, Cyril Micoud wrote: > >> > how each system knew the dispatch router? > >> > >> They just need a host and port; that would be the same even if one > >> was directly connecting to the other. > >> > >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- > >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For > >> additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > >> > >> > >> > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For > > additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional > commands, e-mail: [email protected] > > > B KKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKCB > [ X ܚX K K[XZ[ > \ \ ][ X ܚX P \ Y > \ X K ܙ B ܈ Y ] [ۘ[ [X[ K[XZ[ > \ \ Z [ \ Y > \ X K ܙ B B > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > >
