On 05/14/2010 07:12 PM, John Skopis wrote:
On Thu, May 13, 2010 at 12:38 PM, Gordon Sim<[email protected]> wrote:
On 05/12/2010 06:10 PM, John Skopis wrote:
[snip]
The persistence of the message should not affect this. However subscribers
to a queue will share the messages, so if you have more than one route
through the same queue then the messages will be shared between them. Does
that sound like your case?
What I observed was that if the message was persistent the routes are
active/passive; if the message is non-persistent the routes are
active/active
Maybe I'm misunderstanding what you mean by active/active v.
active/passive here, but the durability of the message should not affect
the routing at all.
I put together this example:
http://springer.networkgimps.com/~skopii/example.tgz
If you have three systems to test pub1, sub1, sub2 run the
pub_setup.sh and sub_setup.sh scripts to create the queues.
In pub_setup.sh you are creating a queue (fed.local) from which messages
will be routed to the subscriber brokers (sub1 and sub2).
This means that any matching message sent to fed.topic on pub1 will be
enqueued on fed.local and delivered to *either* fed.topic on sub1 *or*
to the exchange of the same name on sub2.
Then run the example subscriber.py:
while true; do python subscriber.py; done
and then run publisher.py and dpublisher.py on pub1.
Is it the same for you?
Sorry for the mess. I think the examples demonstrate what I observed
better than I could ever explain.
Thanks,
John
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Apache Qpid - AMQP Messaging Implementation
Project: http://qpid.apache.org
Use/Interact: mailto:[email protected]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Apache Qpid - AMQP Messaging Implementation
Project: http://qpid.apache.org
Use/Interact: mailto:[email protected]
