Github user franz1981 commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/2392
@mtaylor I've addressed the requests you've made and added another test to
cover the case where the queue is being created too :+1:
---
Github user mtaylor commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/2392
@grs These are bugs in the code vs fundamental issues with the underlying
model. We should get these fixed. I don't think these points affect the
current PR.
---
Github user grs commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/2392
Yes, I am sure iof all these points.
---
Github user mtaylor commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/2392
> If the queue and topic with the same name/address were independent, then
clients explicitly selecting one or the other would not see each others
messages. Messages from a sender with
Github user grs commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/2392
If the queue and topic with the same name/address were independent, then
clients explicitly selecting one or the other would not see each others
messages. Messages from a sender with
Github user mtaylor commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/2392
> > With AMQP raw, there is no such thing as a routing type (this is a
broker concept). Therefore messages sent via AMQP to an address should be
routed to any routing type currently
Github user grs commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/2392
> With AMQP raw, there is no such thing as a routing type (this is a broker
concept). Therefore messages sent via AMQP to an address should be routed to
any routing type currently configured
Github user mtaylor commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/2392
There are two things at play here. AMQP raw protocol and extensions to
AMQP that are broker specific.
With AMQP raw, there is no such thing as a routing type (this is a broker
Github user grs commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/2392
I am talking only about the AMQP support. It is inconsistent. It does not
as you say 'honour the sender'. It effectively forces the behaviour of anycast
on all subsequent clients, unless
Github user michaelandrepearce commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/2392
Disagree AMQP is just a protocol. A broker is just another client. There is
nothing to say an address cannot be both anycast and multicast.
And as such if you have
Github user grs commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/2392
@michaelandrepearce re: "if producer explicitly sets a routing type, it
must be honoured", I'm not sure what you mean there.
At least from AMQP, the routing types is a property of the
Github user michaelandrepearce commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/2392
@grs
On 2. I disagree if producer explicitly sets a routing type, it must be
honoured.
Rr defaults these only should be used if producer does not explicitly
Github user franz1981 commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/2392
@michaelandrepearce I think to have misread the issue: the current
behaviour is not bad, just is not taking in consideration the already existing
address routingType(s) and just
Github user grs commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/2392
Two points:
1) in my case, accessing over AMQP, the sender is *not* defining any
routing type
2) I would not expect a sender requesting a routing type explicitly to
redefine a
Github user michaelandrepearce commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/2392
Point here is if the sender has specifically defined that has to be
honoured.
---
Github user grs commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/2392
@michaelandrepearce @franz1981 the issue is that if an address is defined
to be multicast only, then a sender to it over AMQP causes the address to be
redefined as multicast and anycast *and*
Github user franz1981 commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/2392
@michaelandrepearce I understand your point here, just I'm not sure is only
a matter of flexibility here, but more of user expectations and I admit that it
makes this a lot more
Github user michaelandrepearce commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/2392
@franz1981, i dont follow this, its seems to break some of the flexibility,
e.g. if the sender sends to address as multicast then a multicast queue should
be created if no
Github user franz1981 commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/2392
@jbertram I need to run the whole test suite on this first, but feel free
to review it given that you're the last one that has worked near this same code
:+1:
---
19 matches
Mail list logo
