Bugzilla (bugzilla.redhat.com) will be under maintenance for infrastructure upgrades and will not be available on July 31st between 12:30 AM - 05:30 AM UTC. We appreciate your understanding and patience. You can follow status.redhat.com for details.
Bug 592995 - Message propagation with or without "cluster-size" option
Summary: Message propagation with or without "cluster-size" option
Alias: None
Product: Red Hat Enterprise MRG
Classification: Red Hat
Component: qpid-cpp
Version: beta
Hardware: All
OS: Linux
Target Milestone: ---
: ---
Assignee: messaging-bugs
QA Contact: MRG Quality Engineering
Depends On:
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
Reported: 2010-05-17 15:00 UTC by ppecka
Modified: 2010-08-30 11:55 UTC (History)
1 user (show)

Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
Last Closed: 2010-08-30 11:55:31 UTC
Target Upstream Version:

Attachments (Terms of Use)

Description ppecka 2010-05-17 15:00:56 UTC
Description of problem:
regarding of posts under https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=557243, 
behaviour of clustered qpidd nodes with or without "--cluster-size" option changes appereance/doubling of messages over nodes, but not stated in documentation. 

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):

How reproducible:

Steps to Reproduce:
1. run M clustered qpidd instances (for matter of simplicity only two Q1,Q2) WITHOUT option --cluster-size
2. send one batch consisting of N messages to Q1
3. receive ALL messages on Q2
Actual results:
on Q2 or Q1 will be M * N messages

Expected results:
on Q2 or Q1 we can read only N messages

Additional info:
this behaviour can be changed when using "--cluster-size" option

Is this behaviour expected?

Comment 1 Gordon Sim 2010-05-17 16:36:21 UTC
Can you give a bit more detail on reproducing this? I started two brokers in the cluster, created a queue, connected to one node and sent 20 messages. connected to the other node and received the same 20 messages as expected. What am I doing wrong or what am I missing out?

Comment 2 ppecka 2010-05-18 08:51:40 UTC
i'm retesting right now, but still not able to reproduce again on 1.3beta

Comment 3 ppecka 2010-05-18 09:54:40 UTC

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.