[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/QPID-2517?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12858870#action_12858870
]
Rob Godfrey commented on QPID-2517:
-----------------------------------
If we are changing this anyway, it would be convenient if we could allow the
broker to report multiple ports (since the Java Broker at least can run that
way)... ultimately I think a broker may have many "transports", each
"transport" will define a protocol (e.g. TCP), port, protocol version(s) that
it supports, etc... This is certainly a better model of how the java broker is
configured.
> Proposed change to QMF schema for the broker
> --------------------------------------------
>
> Key: QPID-2517
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/QPID-2517
> Project: Qpid
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: C++ Broker, Java Broker
> Reporter: Ted Ross
> Assignee: Ted Ross
> Priority: Minor
> Attachments: broker-idx.diff
>
>
> I would like to make a change to the management schema for the broker. A
> patch will be attached.
> The current schema causes the "broker" object to be indexed by the TCP port.
> This is a problem in clusters where each node in the cluster may have a
> different port. Since the port is part of the index, and the index is used
> as the QMFv2 object identifier, method calls addressed to the broker may not
> be handled uniformly by each node in a cluster.
> The change removes the "index" status from the "port" attribute and adds a
> new index attribute called "name". This name is fixed as "amqp-broker".
> This is a safe thing to do as there is only one broker associated with the
> broker-resident agent.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Apache Qpid - AMQP Messaging Implementation
Project: http://qpid.apache.org
Use/Interact: mailto:[email protected]
