Tim, I really appreciate the help.
Yes there are no serialization errors (or DEBUGS) in the AMQ log. I wrote a
java app to intercept messages from the queue. The message object is not
deserializing (message.getObject() is throwing an error) so I still think
this is the right track.
In JConsole,
Thanks Clebert!! Really apppretiate your help. I will try this out and let
you know the outcome.
Can I get a bit more info on connector's name? Does connector type is
picked up by name?? I tried reading connectors document under 'configuring
transports' but couldn't find much info on significan
I have sent a pull request to your fork fixing a few configuration errors:
https://github.com/abhijith-prabhakar/activemq-artemis/pull/1
You had backup connecting itself and the server wasn't still up.
On Thu, Feb 11, 2016 at 3:56 PM, abhijith wrote:
> Thanks for the response. I have added
I don't know the HornetQ code to know if there are differences (maybe
someone from the Artemis side knows the answer), though I'd expect them to
be very similar.
That does sound like serialization is part of the problem, though I'd
expect to see errors (or at least DEBUGs, if you change the Log4J
Yes we are using ActiveMQObjectMessages. ActiveMQTextMessages are working
for our other queues. I would love to serialize to text but, unfortunately
that isn't an option at this point. We're using object messages with Hornet
without issue. Are there major differences between object messages fro
Thanks for the response. I have added an example with config I am using
here:
https://github.com/abhijith-prabhakar/activemq-artemis/tree/master/examples/bugs
I tried to run Replicated static example test case and it is giving me
different error with embedded broker. Please also note the the abo
What message type are you using? Only ActiveMQObjectMessages (
http://activemq.apache.org/maven/apidocs/org/apache/activemq/command/ActiveMQObjectMessage.html)
would use serialization, so if that's what you're using then try sending an
ActiveMQTextMessage instead and see if it makes it through.
A
Hello everyone!
I hope this email finds you well. I hope everyone is as excited about
ApacheCon as I am!
I'd like to remind you all of a couple of important dates, as well as ask for
your assistance in spreading the word! Please use your social media platform(s)
to get the word out! The more v
Thanks. The messages are not expiring. I believe they are being dequeued by
spring integration but never making it to my consumer. Do you think it
could be a serialization issue?
--
View this message in context:
http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/Messages-dequeued-but-not-consumed-tp470
Can you provide configurations, a running example?
Or an easy way would be you creating a fork of Artemis from
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/, and put what's happening
on an example.
Even a wrong configuration shouldn't throw such exceptions, so I'm
interested on knowing how you man
On 02/11/2016 08:13 AM, atchijov wrote:
> tyvm. That link explains it nicely :)
>
> I assume that it is not decremented for ActiveMQ performance just ignore
> these messages ? No need to do any kind of "purging"?
>
> Cheers
>
>
>
> --
> View this message in context:
> http://activemq.2283324.n4.n
If you don't have any consumers listening on the advisory messages then it
won't dequeue because the messages go away. The messages won't build up
unless you have an actual consumer so you don't need to worry about purging
them at all.
On Thu, Feb 11, 2016 at 8:13 AM, atchijov wrote:
> tyvm. Th
tyvm. That link explains it nicely :)
I assume that it is not decremented for ActiveMQ performance just ignore
these messages ? No need to do any kind of "purging"?
Cheers
--
View this message in context:
http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/ghost-topics-ActiveMQ-Advisory-Producer-Topic-xxx
These are advisory topics. You can disable them but there would be some
side effects such as dynamic networks not working. Take a look at this
page for more information on what they are used for.
http://activemq.apache.org/advisory-message.html
On Thu, Feb 11, 2016 at 6:07 AM, atchijov wrote:
I believe this is currently how it is designed to work. Because the
temporary queue is not part of the dynamicallyIncludedDestinations setting,
the remote broker wouldn't know to forward the message for the new
temporary queue. I haven't looked too closely but most likely some work
would need to
Hi,
I have noticed that for some reason on my ActiveMQ setup for each topic I
have defined, 2 more topics get created. One with prefix
ActiveMQ.Advisory.Consumer.Topic and another with prefix
ActiveMQ.Advisory.Producer.Topic. For example if I define topic:
java:/topic/MyTopic
Than I would s
Hi David,
yes. its works if you remove this. Is this a normal behavior ? I understood
that the flag bridgeTempDestinations acts independently and request reply
works.
As the temp destination is created on the other broker I would have expected
the correcting bridging of the message.
cheers,
Feli
17 matches
Mail list logo
