I am trying to understand if a core bridge on Apache ActiveMQ Artemis Server be configured between the same source and destination server. The reason why I'm doing this is because my publishers write messages to Queue A and Queue B but my subscriber only listens to Queue AB. So my intent is to bridge Queues A and B into Queue AB. From Artemis user manual I read :
The function of a bridge is to consume messages from a source queue, and forward them to a target address, typically on a different Apache ActiveMQ Artemis server
and
In summary, bridges are a way to reliably connect two separate Apache ActiveMQ Artemis servers together. With a core bridge both source and target servers must be Apache ActiveMQ Artemis servers.
What isn't clear to me is if the source and the destination Artemis server could be the same or do they need to be different.
Technically speaking I don't see why a core bridge can't have the same source and destination broker. However, it's not necessary. You can simply use a divert for your use-case. As the documentation states:
Diverts allow you to transparently divert messages routed to one address to some other address, without making any changes to any client application logic.
Related
I'm using Apache ActiveMQ Artemis (N1) for my work, and recently I've got a task to send some messages to another ActiveMQ "Classic" (N2) which is used by another system. However, I don't know how should I write divert configurations at broker.xml file. Is it possible? Could you give an example of divert to another URL-address and queue. Where should I write login/password for connection to N2?
Diverts in ActiveMQ Artemis only work with local resources. To send messages to another instance of ActiveMQ Artemis you'd use a core bridge. However, that only works between instances of ActiveMQ Artemis. ActiveMQ "Classic" doesn't support the protocol which the core bridge uses.
In order to send messages from ActiveMQ Artemis to ActiveMQ "Classic" you'd need to use something like Camel or the JMS bridge shipped with ActiveMQ Artemis. Both of these solutions can be deployed as web applications using the embedded web application server in ActiveMQ Artemis. We ship examples of both. The Camel example is in examples/features/standard/camel/ and the JMS bridge example is in examples/submodules/inter-broker-bridge.
I need your help to suggest me how best I can achieve load balancing using the below diagram. here I am trying to create 2 machines with Master and expecting that the consumer/publisher application will use one common URL( a load-balanced one), where I should not expose the individual VM machine info and port ID. just that load balancer should take care of routing..
this is typically what we do with help of F5 load balancer or HTTP load balancer ..just wondering can be achieved over ActiveMQ and its advisable..?
on other side, I also tried configuring this way on weblogic to consume data from ActiveMQ queue
failover://(tcp://localhost:61616,tcp://localhost:61617)?randomize=true but this does not help.. or WebLogic is not understanding this format.
Messaging connections are stateful. They are not stateless like HTTP connections, and therefore cannot be load-balanced in the same way as HTTP connections. It may be possible to configure an F5 to deal with stateful messaging connections, but I can't say for sure. I'm not an expert on F5.
Both the ActiveMQ Artemis broker itself as well as the JMS client shipped with the broker have load-balancing functionality built in. There's too much to cover here so I recommend you review the clustering documentation for the relevant details.
You might also try using the broker balancer feature. It's currently experimental, but it should be ready to use in the 2.21.0 release coming in the March/April time-frame. It can act like an F5 for your messaging connections, but it can do some more intelligent things like always sending certain clients to the same node which can facilitate certain use-cases which are not possible in a traditional cluster.
The URL failover://(tcp://localhost:61616,tcp://localhost:61617)?randomize=true which are you using is for the OpenWire JMS client shipped with ActiveMQ 5.x. If you're using the core JMS client shipped with ActiveMQ Artemis then you should be using a URL like this instead:
(tcp://localhost:61616,tcp://localhost:61617)?ha=true
client must know all brokers using Failover Transport, right? Like that,
failover:(tcp://broker1:61616,tcp://broker2:61616,tcp://broker3:61616)
Is there optimization,so that the client does not have to know the existence of each broker ?
Put a TCP load balancer in front of the brokers. Only forward requests to the master broker. The LB can ping who's online or not by checking the "Slave" attribute of the broker via Jolokia/JMX.
A standalone approach would be to provide an URL to a comma separated list of broker URLs to try in case of failure. Can be done using the updateURIsURL option in the failover URI.
There is also some possibilities to auto-discover brokers using Multicast or by querying an LDAP directory, but that requires certain infrastructure in place. Read more about it here.
I am confused about the function of Apache ActiveMQ.
I downloaded ActiveMQ from this link.
So I use it this way (environment: Windows 7): I start the bin/activemq.bat, then it works.
My question is: Does this mean I start a server on my machine? When I initialize the ActiveMQConnectionFactory, the broker URL is tcp://localhost:61616. But what if I want my machine to serve as a server and another machine to connect to my server?
Yes, you can use the primary box as a server and have consumers/subscribers running on other boxes (which will need to connect to the server - you will need to specify the server hostname & port for the connection to be established) - once in place, the messages on the server (topic or queue) can be consumed by the clients.
If you one have one producer and one consumer, you can look into using queues - if you have more than one consumer/subscriber, you can look into setting up a topic to which the consumers will subscribe to. Messages need to be inserted to the topic/queue as needed.
You can specify the server information in your code or preferably in the config file.
For reference to topologies:
http://activemq.apache.org/topologies.html
Also, you can choose to persist your messages or not based on your use case. Kaha DB is the preferred route (specially if performance is of concern).
Useful examples:
http://sujitpal.blogspot.com/2007/12/jms-patterns-with-activemq.html
http://vvratha.blogspot.com/2012/05/java-client-to-sendreceive-messages-for.html
Hope it helps.
Apache ActiveMQ ™ is the most popular and powerful open source messaging and Integration Patterns server
& it act like a third party server.
Apache ActiveMQ is fast, supports many Cross Language Clients and Protocols, comes with easy to use Enterprise Integration Patterns and many advanced features while fully supporting JMS 1.1 and J2EE 1.4. Apache ActiveMQ is released under the Apache 2.0 License.
ActiveMQ have the capabilities to send 100 MB single message framework and maintain 1000 concurrent connection simultaneously , for the further information you can check activemq.xml in your documentation.
Further Info at here about the ActiveMQ
Why only can java provide support for failover protocol in activemq whereas not other languages.
My doubt is that in the failover protocol like failover://(tcp://host1:61616,tcp://host2:61616)?randomize=false also the client uses one of the the inner urls like tcp://host1:61616 and then how does the broker comes to know that the call was using some failover protocol or not and then how the broker decides that it needs to replicate the message ?
Please understand that failover protocol is meant for reconnect logic on client side only and AMQ broker isn't even aware if a client is using failover protocol or not.
From the official AMQ documentation:
The Failover transport layers reconnect logic on top of any of the
other transports.
The Failover configuration syntax allows you to specify any number of
composite uris. The Failover transport randomly chooses one of the
composite URI and attempts to establish a connection to it. If it does
not succeed or if it subsequently fails, a new connection is
established to one of the other uris in the list.
Not sure what you mean by replication here but as per the official doc
The Failover transport tracks transactions by default. The inflight
transactions are replayed on reconnection.
There are different scenarios to put up a HA solution with ActiveMQ.
If clients connect using the failover protocol to host1,host2, then the broker setup needs to be setup for HA as well.
One solution is to cluster host1 and host2 in an Active-Active solution. Then messages are always propagated when they are asked for - the queues are shared in the entire cluster among all amq brokers.
Otherwise, if the active-active solution is not prefered, then a master-slave solution can be setup where the two brokers, host1 and host2, share the data area (for instance using a Database for persistance or a shared SAN disk).
There are more combinations of setups, but the failover protocol assumes that the entire solution can handle that messages arrives to different brokers, if one goes down. As far as I know, there is no other magic in the failover protocol, from the broker perspective.