[
https://issues.apache.org/activemq/browse/AMQ-1657?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=55608#action_55608
]
Holly Edelson commented on AMQ-1657:
------------------------------------
The documentation explicitly does state that a configuration of multiple
brokers, which are aware of each other, must be uniquely named.
It is very easy to do this, dynamically or hard-coded, so I don't know whether
new handling is merited here although I could easily argue that elegant or
helpful handling is not a bad idea.
> Bad Things Happen when 2 brokers in Network of Brokers have same name
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: AMQ-1657
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/activemq/browse/AMQ-1657
> Project: ActiveMQ
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: Broker
> Affects Versions: 4.1.1
> Reporter: Aaron Mulder
> Fix For: 5.4.0
>
>
> If you configure a Network of Brokers with 2 brokers, and in the config file,
> both have the same broker name (and same network connection names), then
> there seem to be some pretty unpleasant effects. At a minimum, lots of
> startup errors and dropped connections between the two brokers due to errors
> in DemandForwardingBridge like FirstBroker is already subscribed to temporary
> topic foo and so on. I suspect it also causes messages sent to one broker to
> not always be forwarded to the other broker, though that might be because the
> broker connection is temporarily down due to the errors like mentioned above.
> (However, the symptoms may be hidden depending on your log levels!)
> It would be nice if during startup, if one broker in the network connects to
> another and determines that they both have the same name, there would be some
> sort of catastrophic error that caused the starting broker to immediately
> shut down with a useful error message.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
