Every subscriber needs to know the endpoints it subscribe to.The
other alternative is to place the subscription information in some sort of a
shared location.
And yes, it is expected that Orders.Messages publishers will be at
test_queue

On Thu, Apr 2, 2009 at 6:03 PM, Simone Busoli <[email protected]>wrote:

> Fine, my question is about the bus/endpoint attribute. Does every
> subscriber need that? Should it have the same value among all subscribers?
> Is that the same of the publisher? I know I'm probably missing some basic
> concepts. Given the example you shown, is a publisher which publishes
> messages in category Orders.Messages supposed to have
> msmq://localhost/test_queue as its bus/endpoint?
>
>
> On Thu, Apr 2, 2009 at 23:57, Ayende Rahien <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> each subscriber should have the publisher register in their config.
>>
>> <castle>
>>
>>   <facilities>
>>
>>     <facility id="rhino.esb" >
>>
>>       <bus threadCount="1"
>>
>>            numberOfRetries="5"
>>
>>            endpoint="msmq://localhost/test_queue3"
>>
>>              />
>>
>>       <messages>
>>
>>         <add name="Orders.Messages"
>>
>>              endpoint="msmq://localhost/test_queue"/>
>>
>>         <add name="Shipping.Messages"
>>
>>              endpoint="msmq://localhost/test_queue2"/>
>>
>>       </messages>
>>
>>     </facility>
>>
>>   </facilities>
>>
>> </castle>
>>
>> In this case, this subscriber is going to subscribe to Order.Messages
>> events on test_queue and Shipping.Messages on test_queue2
>> If you have any ConsumerOf<T> where T is in any of Orders.Messages or
>> Shipping.Messages, you will get the message when the message is being fired.
>>
>> On Thu, Apr 2, 2009 at 5:51 PM, Simone Busoli <[email protected]>wrote:
>>
>>> So, let's say I have one publisher and two subscribers. How are the three
>>> supposed to be configured in order for both subscribers to receive a message
>>> when the published publishes it?I'm just talking about the bus/endpoint
>>> attribute and messages configuration section.
>>>
>>> On Thu, Apr 2, 2009 at 23:36, Ayende Rahien <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Can you restart the problem? I am not sure that I understand.If you
>>>> need subscribers, you need to just have the endpoint which publish the
>>>> message.
>>>> Anything else is not necessary, it will auto subscribe and respond to
>>>> messages after that.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, Mar 26, 2009 at 11:04 AM, Simone Busoli <
>>>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Late on this thread, but I'm trying RSB right now on a project
>>>>> and setting up a pub/sub scenario. I'm not sure I understand how multiple
>>>>> subscribers are identified, I have, say, two subscribers that only need to
>>>>> receive messages, and I gave them the same configuration file. From
>>>>> what I can see, giving them the same endpoint uri entails that they are 
>>>>> all
>>>>> the same instance,  therefore when a message is published only one of them
>>>>> receives it.
>>>>> On the other hand, I can see that if every subscriber has a different
>>>>> endpoint everything works correctly.
>>>>> My issue with that is that I'll need several subscribers, whose code
>>>>> and configuration is taken from a build server, which outputs a single
>>>>> configuration file, which, along all the other stuff gets deployed on
>>>>> production machines.
>>>>> As far as I can see this prevents me from using the xml configuration
>>>>> to set up the facility and instead add it to the container during the
>>>>> startup of the application with an endpoint supplied programmatically 
>>>>> based
>>>>> on, for example, the name of the machine.
>>>>> Any ideas?
>>>>>
>>>>> On Thu, Jan 29, 2009 at 21:07, Matt Burton <[email protected]>wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> LOL
>>>>>>
>>>>>> FYI - I shuffled everything around and it's working brilliantly with
>>>>>> the understanding of how pub/sub is actually being carried out. I'll
>>>>>> have to figure out what I want to do about the subscription business -
>>>>>> knowing that I received n responses for n subscribers. Using
>>>>>> ISubscriptionStorage it works great, however I agree it does feel a
>>>>>> bit dirty...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Thu, Jan 29, 2009 at 11:58 AM, Ayende Rahien <[email protected]>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>> > Yes, you can.
>>>>>> > Buy BizTalk
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > On Thu, Jan 29, 2009 at 2:48 PM, Matt Burton <[email protected]>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >> Crap - that's too simple - can't we make it more complicated? :)
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >> Thanks for the clarification - most appreciated.
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >> On Thu, Jan 29, 2009 at 11:43 AM, Ayende Rahien <[email protected]>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>> >> > The way it works.
>>>>>> >> > P1 - publisher of Msg1
>>>>>> >> > S1 - S3 - Subscribers to Ms1
>>>>>> >> >
>>>>>> >> > S1 starts up, it sends an AddSubscription request to P1
>>>>>> >> > P1 publish a Msg1 msg. So it sends it to S1
>>>>>> >> > S2 starts up, it sends an AddSubscription request to P1
>>>>>> >> >
>>>>>> >> > P1 publish a Msg1 msg. So it sends it to S1,S2
>>>>>> >> >
>>>>>> >> > On Thu, Jan 29, 2009 at 2:39 PM, Matt Burton <
>>>>>> [email protected]>
>>>>>> >> > wrote:
>>>>>> >> >>
>>>>>> >> >> Thanks for the responses - most appreciated. Yes - I know that
>>>>>> what
>>>>>> >> >> I'm trying to do is pub/sub - I was referring to the term "load
>>>>>> >> >> balancer" as that appeared to be the mechanics around the store
>>>>>> and
>>>>>> >> >> forward mechanism of publishing a message to multiple
>>>>>> subscribers in
>>>>>> >> >> RSB. I guess I was wrong about that - but I'm a bit confused as
>>>>>> to how
>>>>>> >> >> this is working then.
>>>>>> >> >>
>>>>>> >> >> When you say it should work out of the box - are you referring
>>>>>> to
>>>>>> >> >> pub/sub? I'm guessing I have a fundamental misunderstanding of
>>>>>> the
>>>>>> >> >> mechanics here. Process 1 publishes a message which process 2 is
>>>>>> >> >> subscribed to. Process 2 then publishes a new message which
>>>>>> processes
>>>>>> >> >> A, B, and C are all subscribed to. The way I was thinking about
>>>>>> it was
>>>>>> >> >> that the message would go into a queue and then something would
>>>>>> pick
>>>>>> >> >> up the message and relay it to all the subscribers. Is that not
>>>>>> how it
>>>>>> >> >> works? If not, and the subscribers are simply watching the queue
>>>>>> of
>>>>>> >> >> the publisher, how does the publisher know when all the
>>>>>> subscribers
>>>>>> >> >> have received the message and it can pull the message from the
>>>>>> queue?
>>>>>> >> >>
>>>>>> >> >> Thanks for helping!
>>>>>> >> >> Matt
>>>>>> >> >>
>>>>>> >> >> On Thu, Jan 29, 2009 at 11:22 AM, Ayende Rahien <
>>>>>> [email protected]>
>>>>>> >> >> wrote:
>>>>>> >> >> > inline
>>>>>> >> >> >
>>>>>> >> >> > On Thu, Jan 29, 2009 at 12:39 PM, Matt Burton <
>>>>>> [email protected]>
>>>>>> >> >> > wrote:
>>>>>> >> >> >>
>>>>>> >> >> >> Follow-up question - I saw some activity around the load
>>>>>> balancer in
>>>>>> >> >> >> SVN after my last message and dug into it and discovered the
>>>>>> >> >> >> LoadBalancerHost and it's accompanying
>>>>>> >> >> >> RemoteAppDomainLoadBalancerHost. I'm not using this for my
>>>>>> load
>>>>>> >> >> >> balancer, yet it's still working - so I'm wondering what it
>>>>>> is
>>>>>> >> >> >> exactly
>>>>>> >> >> >> that I've got going here... My workers are configured with
>>>>>> load
>>>>>> >> >> >> balancer endpoints but I'm not sure how the messages are
>>>>>> getting
>>>>>> >> >> >> sent
>>>>>> >> >> >> to the worker queues without the MsmqLoadBalancer in play.
>>>>>> I've been
>>>>>> >> >> >> going through the RSB code but I'm not exactly sure of the
>>>>>> flow at
>>>>>> >> >> >> this point.
>>>>>> >> >> >
>>>>>> >> >> > We have a problem of terminology.
>>>>>> >> >> > What you call load balancer I think about as pub/sub.
>>>>>> >> >> > What the load balancer in RSB is supposed to accomplish is to
>>>>>> let you
>>>>>> >> >> > have
>>>>>> >> >> > several machines sharing the load of a single endpoint.
>>>>>> >> >> > Think about it like a hardware load balancer in front of a
>>>>>> single
>>>>>> >> >> > URL.
>>>>>> >> >> >
>>>>>> >> >> >>
>>>>>> >> >> >> In any event - when I do try to use the LoadBalancerHost or
>>>>>> the
>>>>>> >> >> >> remote
>>>>>> >> >> >> app domain loader it complains about the endpoint and
>>>>>> threadCount
>>>>>> >> >> >> properties that it's dependent on. I saw in the unit tests
>>>>>> how
>>>>>> >> >> >> you're
>>>>>> >> >> >> manually specifying these values when configuring the
>>>>>> container, but
>>>>>> >> >> >> I
>>>>>> >> >> >> don't have hook to do this with the LoadBalancerHost as it
>>>>>> doesn't
>>>>>> >> >> >> use
>>>>>> >> >> >> a bootstrapper to configure the host before starting it, even
>>>>>> if you
>>>>>> >> >> >> specify one. I have the facility configuration in my config
>>>>>> file,
>>>>>> >> >> >> obviously, but it's not picking it up for some reason:
>>>>>> >> >> >
>>>>>> >> >> > It is not done yet, unfortunately.
>>>>>> >> >> >
>>>>>> >> >> >>
>>>>>> >> >> >> public void Start()
>>>>>> >> >> >> {
>>>>>> >> >> >>    var container = new WindsorContainer(new
>>>>>> XmlInterpreter());
>>>>>> >> >> >>    container.Kernel.AddFacility("rhino.esb", new
>>>>>> >> >> >> RhinoServiceBusFacility());
>>>>>> >> >> >>    container.AddComponent<MsmqLoadBalancer>();
>>>>>> >> >> >>
>>>>>> >> >> >>    loadBalancer = container.Resolve<MsmqLoadBalancer>();
>>>>>> >> >> >> }
>>>>>> >> >> >>
>>>>>> >> >> >> It blows up on the Resolve call. What am I missing?
>>>>>> >> >> >>
>>>>>> >> >> >> I'm assuming that if I can get this working that the new
>>>>>> >> >> >> KnownWorkers
>>>>>> >> >> >> public property on MsmqLoadBalancer would be the solution to
>>>>>> my
>>>>>> >> >> >> question below, where I want to know the number of workers
>>>>>> >> >> >> participating in a load balanced scenario, correct?
>>>>>> >> >> >>
>>>>>> >> >> >> Thanks,
>>>>>> >> >> >> Matt
>>>>>> >> >> >>
>>>>>> >> >> >> On Wed, Jan 28, 2009 at 11:05 AM, Matt Burton
>>>>>> >> >> >> <[email protected]>
>>>>>> >> >> >> wrote:
>>>>>> >> >> >> > I have a scenario where I want to have multiple subscribers
>>>>>> to a
>>>>>> >> >> >> > message such that when the message is published each picks
>>>>>> it up
>>>>>> >> >> >> > and
>>>>>> >> >> >> > processes it independently. In terms of config I don't want
>>>>>> to
>>>>>> >> >> >> > have
>>>>>> >> >> >> > the publisher know about each worker node, so I was able to
>>>>>> get
>>>>>> >> >> >> > the
>>>>>> >> >> >> > load balancer concept running and it works just as I had
>>>>>> hoped.
>>>>>> >> >> >> >
>>>>>> >> >> >> > Question - the scenario I'm proving out here is one where
>>>>>> I'm
>>>>>> >> >> >> > provisioning software to machines, so that I receive a
>>>>>> request to
>>>>>> >> >> >> > provision a new tenant and then I publish a message to
>>>>>> create a
>>>>>> >> >> >> > new
>>>>>> >> >> >> > web site for that tenant on N machines. I want to be able
>>>>>> to throw
>>>>>> >> >> >> > a
>>>>>> >> >> >> > new box into the mix and have it participate in the process
>>>>>> >> >> >> > automatically. It would be nice to know whether or not the
>>>>>> >> >> >> > provisioning of the web site was successful on each machine
>>>>>> and
>>>>>> >> >> >> > base
>>>>>> >> >> >> > the completion of the saga on whether or not all boxes
>>>>>> chimed in
>>>>>> >> >> >> > saying they were successful. In order to do that, however,
>>>>>> I'd
>>>>>> >> >> >> > need
>>>>>> >> >> >> > to
>>>>>> >> >> >> > know how many servers were participating, something which
>>>>>> looks
>>>>>> >> >> >> > like
>>>>>> >> >> >> > it would require some tinkering around with the actual
>>>>>> >> >> >> > subscription
>>>>>> >> >> >> > queues themselves to figure out.
>>>>>> >> >> >> >
>>>>>> >> >> >> > What would you advise in this scenario? Fire and forget for
>>>>>> >> >> >> > provisioning the sites - depend on an external solution to
>>>>>> monitor
>>>>>> >> >> >> > errors? Or do I have the workers send back a thumbs up
>>>>>> saying that
>>>>>> >> >> >> > they did their job and when all report back call it good?
>>>>>> If so,
>>>>>> >> >> >> > what
>>>>>> >> >> >> > are my options for determining the number of subscribers in
>>>>>> the
>>>>>> >> >> >> > load
>>>>>> >> >> >> > balanced scenario?
>>>>>> >> >> >> >
>>>>>> >> >> >> > Thanks,
>>>>>> >> >> >> > Matt
>>>>>> >> >> >> >
>>>>>> >> >> >>
>>>>>> >> >> >>
>>>>>> >> >> >
>>>>>> >> >> >
>>>>>> >> >> > >
>>>>>> >> >> >
>>>>>> >> >>
>>>>>> >> >>
>>>>>> >> >
>>>>>> >> >
>>>>>> >> > >
>>>>>> >> >
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > >
>>>>>> >
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>
> >
>

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Rhino Tools Dev" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/rhino-tools-dev?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to