On 3/28/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
From: "Christopher G. Stach II" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> ``tcp'' can refer to _any_ broker, local or remote, that has a TCP
> transportConnector.
I understand; it is also my understanding that TCP transport connector
may be used only if the broker running as a distinct process - either
on the localhost or remotely. I am referring to such a broker as "external
broker" as opposed to one that uses "VM" transport and is hence 'embedded'
inside the (J)VM which defines it. Is this terminology correct?
You can embed a broker inside the same JVM and still use TCP
I just saw Suchitha's response where she says that embedded brokers
may also use TCP connector. Is that possible at all?
Yes. ActiveMQ is pure Java, you can run the broker wherever you like :)
> If you run a vm broker in one webapp and expect
>another webapp to talk to it, you just might run into classloader problems.
Does this mean that distinct webapps in a servlet container wishing to share
a broker may not use an embedded ("VM") broker?
Correct - as they are by definition in different class loaders and so
cannot see each other. As a hack though, you could put all the
ActiveMQ classes on the system class path so that the VM broker is
shared across each web app
--
James
-------
http://radio.weblogs.com/0112098/
