This FAQ entry might help
http://incubator.apache.org/activemq/how-do-i-use-jms-efficiently.html
On 6/12/06, Erin Oceng [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
I am writing multithreaded MQ app code, I am not sure if this is ok (pseudo
code)
Connection connection = createConnection();
for ( each
I think that clears things up for me a bit - what you're proposing makes
sense. I'll poke around today and see what I can come up with.
Thanks,
Nate
On 6/12/06, Brian McCallister [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Jun 12, 2006, at 4:14 PM, Nathan Mittler wrote:
Agreed ... using the type header is
FWIW I'd like to have content-type header support. Couldn't we then
use content-type as the standard header that any Stomp-JMS bridge
would use to decide if something is a TextMessage or a BytesMessage?
On 6/13/06, Nathan Mittler [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I think that clears things up for me a
I agree with all that. In a pure Stomp world, content-type is a very
useful header and probably affect how the stomp client processes the
message.
Whatever the default rule is for Stomp - JMS I'd have thought most
JMS providers would (through configuration or implementation) probably
use that to
Sounds good to me.
+1
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Hiram
Chirino
Sent: Tuesday, June 13, 2006 1:45 PM
To: activemq-dev@geronimo.apache.org
Subject: Re: STOMP and JMSType
On 6/13/06, Mittler, Nathan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Just to
I would suggest that we use a weak form of specification encoding.
ActiveMQ already uses pseudo-urls in a lot of places, and named
transforms trump class names, usually:
yeah! URI style configuration rocks!
-Brian
--
Regards,
Hiram
So it sounds like we're all in agreement on the content-type header. For
text, it would be something like text and for bytes it would be
application/octet-stream. So this would not be an application-level
header, but would be used by my stomp client code to determine which message
type to
