[jira] Issue Comment Edited: (AMQ-1657) Bad Things Happen when 2 brokers in Network of Brokers have same name

["Holly Edelson (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org>]

    [ https://issues.apache.org/activemq/browse/AMQ-1657?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=55608#action_55608 ] 

Holly Edelson edited comment on AMQ-1657 at 11/19/09 1:39 PM:
--------------------------------------------------------------

The documentation explicitly does state that a configuration of multiple brokers, which are aware of each other, must be uniquely named. Is this an issue in 5.3?
 
It is very easy to do this, dynamically or hard-coded, so I don't know whether new handling is merited here although I could easily argue that elegant or helpful handling is not a bad idea.

      was (Author: helena):
    The documentation explicitly does state that a configuration of multiple brokers, which are aware of each other, must be uniquely named. 
 
It is very easy to do this, dynamically or hard-coded, so I don't know whether new handling is merited here although I could easily argue that elegant or helpful handling is not a bad idea.
  
> Bad Things Happen when 2 brokers in Network of Brokers have same name
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: AMQ-1657
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/activemq/browse/AMQ-1657
>             Project: ActiveMQ
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>          Components: Broker
>    Affects Versions: 4.1.1
>            Reporter: Aaron Mulder
>             Fix For: 5.4.0
>
>
> If you configure a Network of Brokers with 2 brokers, and in the config file, both have the same broker name (and same network connection names), then there seem to be some pretty unpleasant effects.  At a minimum, lots of startup errors and dropped connections between the two brokers due to errors in DemandForwardingBridge like FirstBroker is already subscribed to temporary topic foo and so on.  I suspect it also causes messages sent to one broker to not always be forwarded to the other broker, though that might be because the broker connection is temporarily down due to the errors like mentioned above.  (However, the symptoms may be hidden depending on your log levels!)
> It would be nice if during startup, if one broker in the network connects to another and determines that they both have the same name, there would be some sort of catastrophic error that caused the starting broker to immediately shut down with a useful error message.

-- 
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.