Hey JB,
Could using vm for the transport connector be an issue with the broker
being remote on a separate server? I have not attempted changing this to
tcp as of yet since I only just learned of this configuration.
Chris
On Tue, Nov 19, 2019 at 12:56 PM Jean-Baptiste Onofré
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> sa
Hi,
same behavior using the tcp transport connector instead of vm and
advisory enabled ?
I will try to reproduce tomorrow.
Regards
JB
On 19/11/2019 19:00, Christopher Mathrusse wrote:
> Hi JB,
>
> Yes, the broker does have schedulerSupport set to true.
> http://activemq.apache.org/schema/c
Hi,
It seems your consumer is slow. I guess you are using the auto_ack on
the client side. You can increase the number of concurrent consumer and
also increase the messages expiration.
I would investigate on the consumer front why it's slow.
Regards
JB
On 19/11/2019 18:28, Harishravi wrote:
> H
Hi,
I have a Producer which is sending 60-100 messages to an ActiveMQ and I see
the messages were sent successfully and I see them in ActiveMQ. I have a
consumer which is consuming these messages but I see that when the number of
messages produced by the producer increases I see the messages not b
Hi JB,
Yes, the broker does have schedulerSupport set to true.
http://activemq.apache.org/schema/core";
brokerName="broker-vv"
advisorySupport="false"
dataDirectory="/data2/activemq-data/vv"
schedulerSupport="true"
schedulePeriodForDe
Hi Chris,
You are using tcp connection right ?
What's the provider URL you are using in the connection factory ?
In your activemq.xml scheduler support is enabled in the
element right ?
Regards
JB
On 19/11/2019 18:42, Christopher Mathrusse wrote:
> We are currently running ActiveMQ version 5.
We are currently running ActiveMQ version 5.15.3 for our broker within a
Docker container. The ActiveMQ client version was just upgraded to 5.15.10,
but we were experiencing the issue prior to the upgrade when our client was
running version 5.6.
We are constantly experiencing communication failure
The results of your test are not surprising. You've essentially reproduced
the situation discussed in the network isolation documentation [1]. Since
you only have 1 live and 2 backups you have no real quorum which can be
used to make decisions with when situations like this arise. You also
haven't
Hi,
we setup an Artemis cluster with three broker instances installed on AWS
each in a different availability zones (A,B,C).
Only one of the broker instances is configured as master, because Artemis
message redistribution does not
take message filters into account
(https://activemq.apache.org/comp
Hello JB,
Do i need to create a Jira issue for the same or the issue created here is
more than enough?
Once you have a working config where you dont face the issue, please let me
know
Regards
Ashish
--
Sent from: http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/ActiveMQ-User-f2341805.html
Hi,
Not sure message group is exactly what you need.
Definitely, ActiveMQ queueing and redelivery can help there, but the
Came routes logic of messages dependency should stay there.
I think that you can achieve something on the Camel/ESB side using
client ack. Then, after redelivery count exceed
Hi
nothing special, a regular kahadb instance (with some tuning but nothing
major).
Regards
JB
On 19/11/2019 12:47, Ashish Vaishno wrote:
> Hello JB,
>
> Can you send me the config that you are using for persistence ? Have you
> enabled any parameters ?
>
> Regards
> Ashish
>
>
>
> --
> Se
Hello
Sorry this is possibly a newbie question and not specifically to do with
ActiveMQ although ActiveMQ is a player.
We are using a ESB (Talend) and are trying to think about our design of
Routes where message order is vital (for example: message 1 is an order and
message 2 is a cancel). And
Hello JB,
Can you send me the config that you are using for persistence ? Have you
enabled any parameters ?
Regards
Ashish
--
Sent from: http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/ActiveMQ-User-f2341805.html
14 matches
Mail list logo
