Is there a clear explanation anywhere of exactly what Broker federation offers without corosync? If I can meet my requirements by fixing this, and the scope of work is within an order of magnitude of rolling my own load balancing, I'd rather fix Qpid. I looked at it once, and it was in some overly clever and difficult to follow code, so I stopped, but I've spent a lot of time in the broker and low level Windows transport layers fixing other bugs, as has another senior member of my team...
On Fri, Jun 21, 2013 at 5:25 AM, Gordon Sim <[email protected]> wrote: > On 06/17/2013 07:31 PM, Steve Huston wrote: > >> And anything you can think of for dynamically load balancing across >>>> >>> brokers? >>> >>> Honestly, I think the simplest solution overall is for us to get >>> federation >>> working on windows. I assume its some issue in the IO layer. >>> Does anyone have a concrete understanding of what the problem is and >>> what is required to fix it? >>> >>> Any volunteers from our windows experts to take a look (Cliff, Chuck, >>> Andrew, Steve)? >>> >> >> https://issues.apache.org/**jira/browse/QPID-2199<https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/QPID-2199> >> >> It is likely not a very complicated issue once it's understood more. >> Getting the time/funding to do it has been the only impediment. >> > > A view was expressed that this was because the AsynchConnector for windows > was not in fact asynchronous. I'm a little sceptical of that, though I > admit I haven't looked into the issue at all. > > The underlying socket is reported to be established. As Ted suggests in > his comment, perhaps that the link registry has not been notified or was > unable to match the notification to the pending link. > > The connection id and federation link matching was very fragile in earlier > versions (and seems now to be a little more robust). For example > https://issues.apache.org/**jira/browse/QPID-4315<https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/QPID-4315>, > where SSL federation broke if hostnames were used qith qpid-route. > > Could a similar issue be (or have been) behind the windows problem? > > Has anyone tried with a recent broker? E.g. 0.22 or trunk? There have been > quite a few changes in the codepaths involved. > > > ------------------------------**------------------------------**--------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: > [email protected].**org<[email protected]> > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > >
