[jira] [Closed] (AMQ-3217) static:// URI behavoir inconsistent

["Matt Pavlovich (Jira)" <ji...@apache.org>]

     [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AMQ-3217?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ]

Matt Pavlovich closed AMQ-3217.
-------------------------------
    Resolution: Not A Problem

> static:// URI behavoir inconsistent
> -----------------------------------
>
>                 Key: AMQ-3217
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AMQ-3217
>             Project: ActiveMQ
>          Issue Type: Bug
>          Components: Connector, Documentation
>    Affects Versions: 5.4.2
>         Environment: Windows development, Linux production
>            Reporter: Matt Pavlovich
>            Assignee: Matt Pavlovich
>            Priority: Major
>
> The behavior of the static:// URI is inconsistent when used with a network connector from a store-and-forward broker, to multiple broker.
> Take the scenario: 
>  Broker 1: Stand alone AMQ broker (JDBC Oracle backend, SSL)
>  Broker 2: Stand alone AMQ broker (JDBC Oracle backend, SSL)
>  SnF Broker A: Configured with network connector: static:(ssl://broker1, ssl://broker2)
> Messages sent to SnF Broker A are forwarded to Broker 1 and Broker 2 in a load balanced fashion, even when there are no consumers on Broker 1 and Broker 2.  
> However, in the event that Broker 1 and Broker 2 are taken down, the SnF Broker A will only send messages to Broker 1 (based on being listed first in the static:// uri-- switching order was tested and behavior confirmed.), even if both Broker 1 and Broker 2 are brought back up at the same time.
> Question 1: What is the defined behavior of the static:// URI?  The documentation and implementation seem inconsistent.  Is the "load balancing" effect expected?
> Question 2: Depending on the answer to Question 1, Is it a bug if the SnF broker does not forward messages to Broker 2 after a restart of Broker 2?
> Thank you,
> Matt
>  



--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.3.4#803005)