>
> I need to remove my JMS single point of failure (SPF) in my current
> design.
>
> Scenario:
>
> 1000 end-user applications will publish to n topics. Each end-user
> application will be given primary and secondary broker addresses
> (different
> machines).
>
> There are four message brokers running on two machines (2 brokers per
> machine, each machine is quad-processor).
>
> There are three backend servers that serve different functions. Each
> server
> has a corresponding warm-backup server running in case of failure.
>
> If each backend server creates two durable subscribers on two different
> brokers on different host machines for each topic, then have I removed
> my
> JMS SPF? I think I have. Are there errors in my thinking?
It's ok. Keep in mind that each durable subscriber you create is active
the whole time. Maybe you should use message expiration.
The way you interconnect each of the routers is only dependend on your
availability strategy. Each router-router connection provides one more
route resp. one more alternative to reach a given destination.
--
Andreas Mueller, [EMAIL PROTECTED], IIT GmbH, Bremen/Germany, http://www.iit.de
SwiftMQ, JMS Enterprise Messaging System, http://www.swiftmq.com
------------------------------------------------------
SwiftMQ developers mailing list * http://www.swiftmq.com
To unsubscribe from this list, send an eMail to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] and write in the body of your message:
UNSUBSCRIBE developers <your-email-address>
Archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/developers@mail.iit.de/
