Thanks! Is there a downside of using rebalance?
Also, does it cleanly kill client connections.
Thanks for your help
On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 1:39 PM, Christian Posta
wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 1:54 PM, Mohit Anchlia >wrote:
>
> > Thanks! Is the feature still is rebalanceClusterClients=tru
On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 1:54 PM, Mohit Anchlia wrote:
> Thanks! Is the feature still is rebalanceClusterClients=true? I tried that
> and the client was hanging for some reason.
>
Yep. It should be enabled on the broker side only and the client should be
using the failover:() transport.
>
> On Tu
Thanks! Is the feature still is rebalanceClusterClients=true? I tried that
and the client was hanging for some reason.
On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 12:42 PM, Christian Posta wrote:
> It's part of 5.7, ie, the features are available, but they are not enabled
> by default.
>
>
> On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at
It's part of 5.7, ie, the features are available, but they are not enabled
by default.
On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 1:37 PM, Mohit Anchlia wrote:
> On this page it says that rebalanceClusterClients is only valid for 5.4? Is
> this part of 5.7 by default and need not be configured?
>
> http://activemq
Hello,
I am getting a lot of nacked messages in a queue.
Below are some of the numbers.
Enqueue/Deqeueue Counters
enqueued: 5,555 messages (3.042 mb), 2 seconds ago
dequeued: 846 messages (405.29 kb), 2 hours 37 minutes ago
nacked: 3,647,776 messages (2.1043 gb), 1 seconds ago
expired: 0 mes
On Tue, 2013-01-29 at 05:43 -0800, Gangadhar Rao wrote:
> How do we know the specific exception type what the CMS API is throwing...
>
> I have looked at the CMS documentation and the API's are returning the
> CMSException typeand not the specific CMSSecurityException for
> example
>
> So
How do we know the specific exception type what the CMS API is throwing...
I have looked at the CMS documentation and the API's are returning the
CMSException typeand not the specific CMSSecurityException for
example
So in this case how do we actually get the specific exception type
The following scenario:
Master and slave share a datastore. Master fails, slave takes over.
Is it possible to define a forwarding connection from this slave to another
(master) broker, with the result that the slave broker finds the stored
messages sent to the failed master, and automatically send
