Hi Tim,
Thanks. After we fixed the problematic client, ActiveMQ is working as
expected. The producer count stays stable even client exits abnormally.
ActiveMQ is doing the cleanup correctly.
--
View this message in context:
http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/Producer-count-keeps-increasing-
Answer to this please.
--
View this message in context:
http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/Integrating-ActiveMQ-with-a-shared-user-database-tp2343451p4714291.html
Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
I wouldn't expect that to be normal behavior, but I don't use transactions
so I can't say for certain. But my starting assumption would be that that
means something's wrong in your setup or in the behavior of your
producers/consumers.
Tim
On Tue, Jul 19, 2016 at 9:14 AM, Martin Lichtin
wrote:
Glad you found the problem.
The answer to your question about the behavior if the TCP connection is
broken is that yes, I believe that will cause a cleanup. But keep in mind
that hard-killing a process with an open TCP connection doesn't result in
the connection closing till the OS times it out,
OK, so you're looking for competing consumers, which queues give you by
default. The caveat to that statement is that if you have a large prefetch
buffer (e.g. the default value of 1000) and one consumer connects before
the other one and there are messages waiting on the queue, up to the
prefetch
I don't run on Windows, so I can't help with specifics, but in general
you'll need to make sure you deconflict the ports used by the two services
to let them co-exist. You can set those ports via environment variables
(letting you use a single config file) or hard-code the ports in the config
file
The community as a whole is not focusing exclusively on Artemis. Some
people work on Artemis, some people work in 5.x. Many people hope and
expect that at some point, Artemis will take over as ActiveMQ 6.x (whether
it's called that or not), and the 5.x codebase would then be left behind,
but it's
Without knowing for sure, I'd guess it's a bug that hasn't been fixed (and
probably doesn't have a JIRA bug open for it), so I'd suggest you submit a
JIRA bug about it.
Tim
On Tue, Jul 19, 2016 at 11:29 PM, Jawad Bokhari <
jawad.bokh...@expertflow.com> wrote:
> The priroity backup feature isn't
Are there any another plugins for simpleAuthentication of ActiveMQ? I want to
configure my user realm and authentication to be in a database like MySQL. I
got this idea thru the concept of jdbcRealm.
Essential Part:
I'm using tomEE to host my ActiveMQ application and therefore disregarding
jetty.
Tim Bain wrote
> Can you please explain what aspects of your answer are expected to solve
> the specific problem that Martin is describing in this thread, and why
> they're expected to solve it? At first glance, I don't see why using
> synchronous TCP closes would influence failover of connections
Hi,
I’m not sure how to approach fixing this. We have a very large code base
which makes it tough to post test here that can be reproduced easily on other
systems, otherwise I’d do it. I’m posting this here in case someone else as
run across this issue:
We’re getting a seg fault when the S
The semantics you described wouldn't be what you'd want for either queues
or topics, and if your developers really did implement that, I expect you'd
have problems long before KahaDB disk space became an issue.
Do you have any consumers (including offline durable subscribers) on those
topics? If
I am using ActiveMQ-5.13.3 with jdk1.7.0_79 on a Windows 7 laptop for
testing. I ran bin\activemq-admin and created two instances: prod and test.
I successfully started both instances from the command line and they work
great. I would like to create two Window's Services: one for prod and the
ot
Hi Tim
Thanks for the response.
Perhaps round robin is not the best way to describe it.
What I am trying to do is this. I have a producer that sends XML messages to
the queue.
This happens quite fast. I then have to consume theses messages, process
these messages
and send the result to a databas
Hello Everyone,
Apache ActiveMQ 5.13.4 has been released.
This release contains a number of improvements and bug fixes found since
the 5.13.3 release.
A list of issues fixed in this release is available here:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?version=12335661&projectId=12311
Hi All,
I'm wondering if someone can point me in the right direction, I'm
struggling to find how to reduce the size taken by the Kahadb log
files.
I've been searching online and everything points to messages that are
sat on the queue that have not been ack'd by a consumer. I'm using
Hawtio to lo
Can you please explain what aspects of your answer are expected to solve
the specific problem that Martin is describing in this thread, and why
they're expected to solve it? At first glance, I don't see why using
synchronous TCP closes would influence failover of connections managed by a
connectio
Hi,
configure your broker URL with this
failover:tcp://:,tcp://:?closeAsync=false
Hope it helps!
Regards,
Crishel Yumul
DevOps
TORO Limited
--
View this message in context:
http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/Consumer-does-not-reconnect-tp4714039p4714219.html
Sent from the ActiveMQ - User m
Hi
Yes, this shifts the probabilities somewhat, but still doesn't make it work
all the time. In the exact current setup plus ?create=false I got 3 times
missed messages and 17 successes.
But I still have a Thread.sleep at the beginning of every test and a
System.gc which should both not be necess
19 matches
Mail list logo
