Hi, Justin.
We are getting this condition every day. Here is some more information.
When largemessages directory has some files that do not get processed, we
can still get the count
of messages in queues like this:
ObjectName queueName =
ObjectNameBuilder.DEFAULT.getJMSQueueObjectName(queueNa
Yeah, giving the full config may let us spot a problem if there is one.
Also, if you stop the broker and delete the "incorrect" KahaDB directory
and then start the broker again, is the directory recreated immediately
upon startup?
On Jan 29, 2016 7:13 AM, "burner" wrote:
> Tim Bain wrote
> > I d
Hey, thank Clebert! I'll check it out!
On Thu, Jan 28, 2016 at 6:32 PM, Clebert Suconic
wrote:
> although.. look at activemq for some comparison:
> http://activemq.apache.org/persistence.html
>
>
> and look at artemis for some comparison if that helps:
> http://activemq.apache.org/artemis/docs/
Unfortunately, I had to back this commit out, you can track it here:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AMQ-6136
The Spring DM dependency is causing problems and needs to be removed as it
is deprecated. (there is already a jira for this, AMQ-5932)
At this point this will most likely have to wa
I've never used any of the three (my use cases have always been for
non-persistent messages because we wanted speed and were willing to accept
losing messages if the broker crashed), but based on the past year and a
half of monitoring the mailing list, I agree with Chris's assessments.
JDBC is lit
Did you get any progress on WMQ to ActiveMQ migration?
I am also looking for some tool for such migration.
--
View this message in context:
http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/IBM-WebSphere-MQ-to-Apache-ActiveMQ-migration-tp3168950p4706626.html
Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailing list archi
Tim Bain wrote
> I don't have any guesses about why there would be two KahaDB instances,
> one
> by hostname (localhost) and one by the IP address that corresponds to it.
> I can't imagine that we'd do a DNS lookup to get the IP. I assume there's
> nowhere in your config where you've used the IP i
Hi Tim
I seems to work better but now I've got message reading issues with my Java app.
I'll fix my readers before testing further the AMQ.
thanks
marc
Le 28/01/2016 15:17, Tim Bain [via ActiveMQ] a écrit :
No, I meant that I think the amidala broker shouldn't have a
networkConnector to amidala, a
You are right, and I do prefer KahaDB due to its performance (as long as
LevelDB seems to be just "beta-stable").
Such a decision needs to be made after careful consideration of the
trade-offs.
On the strength of our past experience some customers have much less
traffic resp. no the highest perform
I'm still not seeing an acknowledge call on the message. What am I
missing?
On Jan 28, 2016 11:25 PM, "Bjand" wrote:
> I made a connection manager, since a connection is also used in a Pub/Sub
> implementation. The connection manager simply holds the Connection,
> Session,
> Username and Passwor
You can use the ConstantPendingMessageLimitStrategy (see
http://activemq.apache.org/slow-consumer-handling.html), but that will
apply to both offline and active durable subscribers. I don't know of a
way to limit offline durable subscribers without limiting active ones.
Tim
On Jan 29, 2016 12:04
Only persistent messages are stored in the persistence store;
non-persistent messages will be lost after a restart no matter what
persistence store you choose. Are you sure your messages are persistent?
If you turn off broker B and repeat your test, what's the behavior?
Tim
On Jan 29, 2016 3:14
Keep in mind that KahaDB will be significantly faster than any JDBC
persistence solution, so if you switch to JDBC than you will have a large
performance hit.
On Fri, Jan 29, 2016 at 3:34 AM, Klaus Pittig <
klaus.pit...@futura4retail.com> wrote:
> I agree. We also ran into several issues using Le
Just wanted to add some info:
When it works:
1. I run a publisher java class [master A and slave B are up]
2. Sends messages through master broker A.
3. I run consumer java class to receive the messages which works fine.
When it doesn't:
1. I run a publisher java class [master A and slave B are up
I agree. We also ran into several issues using LevelDB and decided to
switch back to KahaDB as the default persistence, even if it's slower.
Our efforts repairing LevelDB storages on many different machines were
only with moderate success.
In contrast handling problems with KahaDB is a straightfor
Hello,
I'm new to ActiveMQ. I have setup a shared file system Master/Slave with
failover on my local.
The master/slave works fine with locks and all but once the master goes
down, the messages are lost.
I'm using a shared path for the data [LevelDB persistance]
Here is the configuration:
Master
16 matches
Mail list logo
