Github user mattrpav commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/1820#discussion_r164272477
--- Diff:
artemis-jms-client/src/main/java/org/apache/activemq/artemis/jms/client/ActiveMQSession.java
---
@@ -698,8 +699,17 @@ private ActiveMQMessageConsumer createConsumer(final
ActiveMQDestination dest,
*/
if (!response.isExists() ||
!response.getQueueNames().contains(dest.getSimpleAddress())) {
if (response.isAutoCreateQueues()) {
+ SimpleString queueNameToUse = dest.getSimpleAddress();
+ SimpleString addressToUse = queueNameToUse;
+ RoutingType routingTypeToUse = RoutingType.ANYCAST;
+ if
(CompositeAddress.isFullyQualified(queueNameToUse.toString())) {
+ CompositeAddress compositeAddress =
CompositeAddress.getQueueName(queueNameToUse.toString());
+ addressToUse = new
SimpleString(compositeAddress.getAddress());
+ queueNameToUse = new
SimpleString(compositeAddress.getQueueName());
+ routingTypeToUse = RoutingType.MULTICAST;
--- End diff --
@michaelandrepearce I shared some use cases and scenarios regarding 5.x
virtual topics on 550. JMS 2.0 SharedDurable subscriptions is only one use case
that virtual topics help with. However, there are several that JMS 2.0 SDS
wonât cover that 5.x virtual topics do. Additionally, other brokers have
these features, so I believe they are âmessaging patternsâ vs âActiveMQ
5.x-onlyâ thing.
Check it out, and let me know if you want to hop on irc or a chat to go
review it.
At any rate, I think Artemis would benefit from supporting virtual topics
(or whatever new name is more suitable)
---
