Yeah, I have exactly that scenario ;)
James.Strachan wrote: > > On 1/11/07, Abdul Alhazred <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Interesting, so what about using a multicast transport with a network of >> brokers? If all the brokers can see the multicast then they shouldn't >> need >> store and forward at all. > > I'd recommend TCP if you want reliability. Currently we tend to use > multicast purely for discovery as if a node misses a message due to > packet loss (or the input buffer being full so the network card > discards it) then a point-to-point redelivery mechanism is required > which can cause network storms if you're not careful. We've got the > start of a basic implentation of reliable UDP/multicast but its not > completely flushed out and working just yet. > > If the messages are small (so they fit inside a single datagram) and > you don't care about loosing them (such as for market data prices) by > all means give multicast a try if you want. > > -- > > James > ------- > http://radio.weblogs.com/0112098/ > > -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/High-Volume-of-messages-tf2941814.html#a8298155 Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
