Instances

[Linus Brimstedt <li...@brimstedt.se>]

Hello,

Im using child instances to keep different clients separated, but several
clients may use the same units.

What I didnt realize, was that activemq was shared between instances;
probably for a good reason.

But does this mean that i have to name the queues and topics dynamicly for
each instance?

I.e., if i just make camel route like from("activemq:queue:someName") and
deploy the unit in several instances, any instance may pick up the messages
sent from any instance. (rather than message put on queue X in instance A
only being picked up by units in instance A)

So, is there another way to keep messages separated within an instance other
than by naming (or like I did now: switch to seda)

/linus

Re: Instances

[Linus Brimstedt <li...@brimstedt.se>]

Yes,
I share the same broker.

It seems like it would be beneficial considering overhead, memory, etc, but
it does add some extra complexity.

Anyway, now that'im aware of it, most of the problem is gone, but you can
imagine my confusion when routes that had been working perfectly suddenly
failed due to messages being mixed:-)
Thanks
/L
Den 22 jun 2011 07:52 skrev "Jean-Baptiste Onofré" <jb...@nanthrax.net>:
> Hi Linus,
>
> Each instance is completely atomic. It means that if you deploy an
> ActiveMQ broker is several instance, you should setup to use different
> port number, etc.
> On the other hand, you can share an unique broker.
>
> In your case, I guess that you share the same broker between several
> instance. Take a look on etc/activemq-broker.xml configuration to check
it.
>
> Regards
> JB
>
> On 06/21/2011 10:42 PM, Linus Brimstedt wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> Im using child instances to keep different clients separated, but several
>> clients may use the same units.
>>
>> What I didnt realize, was that activemq was shared between instances;
>> probably for a good reason.
>>
>> But does this mean that i have to name the queues and topics dynamicly
for
>> each instance?
>>
>> I.e., if i just make camel route like from("activemq:queue:someName") and
>> deploy the unit in several instances, any instance may pick up the
messages
>> sent from any instance. (rather than message put on queue X in instance A
>> only being picked up by units in instance A)
>>
>> So, is there another way to keep messages separated within an instance
other
>> than by naming (or like I did now: switch to seda)
>>
>> /linus
>>

Re: Instances

[Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb...@nanthrax.net>]

Hi Linus,

Each instance is completely atomic. It means that if you deploy an 
ActiveMQ broker is several instance, you should setup to use different 
port number, etc.
On the other hand, you can share an unique broker.

In your case, I guess that you share the same broker between several 
instance. Take a look on etc/activemq-broker.xml configuration to check it.

Regards
JB

On 06/21/2011 10:42 PM, Linus Brimstedt wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Im using child instances to keep different clients separated, but several
> clients may use the same units.
>
> What I didnt realize, was that activemq was shared between instances;
> probably for a good reason.
>
> But does this mean that i have to name the queues and topics dynamicly for
> each instance?
>
> I.e., if i just make camel route like from("activemq:queue:someName") and
> deploy the unit in several instances, any instance may pick up the messages
> sent from any instance. (rather than message put on queue X in instance A
> only being picked up by units in instance A)
>
> So, is there another way to keep messages separated within an instance other
> than by naming (or like I did now: switch to seda)
>
> /linus
>