[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ARTEMIS-1205?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16037034#comment-16037034
]
Michael Andre Pearce edited comment on ARTEMIS-1205 at 6/5/17 2:29 PM:
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
[~gemmellr] edited :)
So we saying Artemis client behaviour here is incorrect?
was (Author: michael.andre.pearce):
[~gemmellr] its the same naming semantic as the artemis core client makes. As
such as noted in the test cases, whilst not only fixing the issue that simply
shared consumer using AMQP on artemis didn't work as its meant to, it also
makes it compatible with the artemis core client, as such you can share a
subscription with amqp and core client.
[~gemmellr] any idea whats occurring with the Durable (non-shared) case?
essentially it seems the broker is not allowing the connection where a client
id already exists where as artemis client, it seemingly allows.
> AMQP Shared Durable Subscriber incorrect behaviour.
> ---------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: ARTEMIS-1205
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ARTEMIS-1205
> Project: ActiveMQ Artemis
> Issue Type: Bug
> Reporter: Michael Andre Pearce
> Priority: Blocker
> Attachments: AMQPMissbehaviour.xlsx, JMSDurableConsumerTest2.java,
> JMSSharedDurableConsumerTest.java
>
>
> Summary observations :
> • There’s different behaviour between AMQP and the Artemis clients
> • There's UUID subscription name in the subscription topic when you’re
> using the AMQP client, you don’t set the client ID and you’ve selected a
> durable & shared subscription. It should just be the subscription name, like
> with the Artemis client.
> • The AMQP client seems to have a problem if you try to create a new
> durable, non-shared subscription on the same topic with the same client ID
> and a different subscription name.
>
> The artemis client doesn’t have a problem with this.
>
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.15#6346)
