Thanks John for your reply! I try to do it as your suggestion that testing it on removing the destionation inclusions setting, but the problem still exists.
John Heitmann wrote: > > Ah, you're getting that from http://www.activemq.org/site/networks-of- > brokers.html which looks like it has some bad character escaping or > something going on. Try instead: > I actually check the character by ultraedit, not finding any bad character escaping. Follow is my testing steps: A: start brokerA with network of brokers conf, see example as follow <networkConnectors> <networkConnector name="broker19" uri="static://(tcp://ip1:61616)" failover="true" networkTTL="2"/> </networkConnectors> B: start brokerB by default: C: then brokerA print out "Network connection between vm://localhost#0 and tcp://ip1:61616(localhost) has been established." means nework connect successfully. D: then i send the text message to brokerA, and successfully recieved message from brokerB. network of brokers works. E: then i pull the brokerB out of the network service, then i find that brokerA can't connect to it. brokerA print out"WARN DemandForwardingBridge - Outbound transport to localhost interruptted" F: then i send the text message again to brokerA, so the message can't be pass to brokerB as of can't be connected to brokerB. G: then i recover the net work service for brokerB, and brokerA print out "Network connection between vm://localhost#0 and tcp://ip1:61616(localhost) has been established." again H: then i try to recieve message from brokerB, nothing recieved. even if send more messages to brokerA, no message passes to brokerB. I: if i want it to be work again, just need to restart brokerA then i works now.( it's a bad feeling to do it) Here is my question again: 1. could anyone tell me the failure of my testing is that network of brokers not provide such feature or is there something I configure it error or mistake? could anyone do me a favor? Thx! Matt. John Heitmann wrote: > > > On Aug 11, 2006, at 2:51 AM, Matthew Xie wrote: > >> >> Hi every! >> I have two brokers, brokerA and brokerB. >> I want to brokerA and brokerB establish the feature of network of >> brokers. >> when I send message to brokerA, it will passed the message to the >> BrokerB. >> here I need to notice that if brokerB fail down, then the messages >> be send >> to brokerA cann't pass the messages to the brokerB. can network of >> brokers >> do this feature if brokerB startup all the message live in brokerA >> could >> pass to brokerB if they reestablish the network of brokers. > > Yup, network of brokers should be perfect for this. > >> following is my conf. i try to do it , but failed. could some one >> tell me is >> here something wrong?? >> >> BrokerA: >> <networkConnector name="broker19" uri="static://(tcp:// >> ip1:61616)" >> failover="true" networkTTL="2"> >> name=bridgeA >> dynamicOnly=false >> conduitSubscriptions=true >> decreaseNetworkConsumerPriority=false >> >> <staticallyIncludedDestinations> >> <queue physicalName="QP_TEST.Queue"/> >> </staticallyIncludedDestinations> >> <dynamicallyIncludedDestinations> >> <queue physicalName="QP_TEST.Queue"/> >> </dynamicallyIncludedDestinations> >> >> </networkConnector> > > Ah, you're getting that from http://www.activemq.org/site/networks-of- > brokers.html which looks like it has some bad character escaping or > something going on. Try instead: > > <networkConnectors> > <networkConnector name="broker19" uri="static://(tcp:// > ip1:61616)" failover="true" networkTTL="2"/> > </networkConnectors> > > Once you get that working you can add the destination inclusions back > in. > > If you're on linux you can run 'xmllint --noout activemq.xml' to get > help showing ill-formed xml constructs in your config. > > John > > -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/can-network-of-brokers-dothis-feature--tf2089718.html#a5790290 Sent from the ActiveMQ - User forum at Nabble.com.
