[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       activemq-dev
Subject:    [jira] [Commented] (AMQ-3917) ActiveMQ should support multiple durable subscriptions per Stomp clien
From:       "Timothy Bish (JIRA)" <jira () apache ! org>
Date:       2015-02-26 16:49:04
Message-ID: JIRA.12597994.1341824198000.23933.1424969344826 () Atlassian ! JIRA
[Download RAW message or body]


    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AMQ-3917?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14338680#comment-14338680 \
] 

Timothy Bish commented on AMQ-3917:
-----------------------------------

Added a note about that to the docs.

> ActiveMQ should support multiple durable subscriptions per Stomp client
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> Key: AMQ-3917
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AMQ-3917
> Project: ActiveMQ
> Issue Type: New Feature
> Components: Broker, stomp
> Affects Versions: 5.5.1, 5.6.0
> Environment: linux, solaris
> Reporter: Bhanu
> Assignee: Timothy Bish
> Priority: Minor
> Fix For: 5.7.0
> 
> 
> This is coming from AMQ-3802.
> Quoting Timothy - "This is another limitation of the Stomp support which allows for \
> only one durable subscription since clientId and subscription name are linked. This \
> is because the Stomp v1.0 spec didn't require that you assign unique Ids to \
> subscriptions, so the correlation is made per connection using the matching \
> clientId and subscription name. You can work around this by creating a connection \
> for each durable subscriber." Now, since ActiveMQ v5.6.0 supports Stomp v1.1 which \
> has made the id header mandatory for subscribe and unsubscribe calls, we should \
> leverage this feature and allow for multiple durable subscriptions per stomp \
> client. Hacks like creating a separate connection for each durable subscriber \
> should be avoided. Let me know if you have any queries?
> Thanks,
> Bhanu



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)


[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]