at to
something reasonably higher it now works as expected for both cleaning up
the disk and spooling.
Hope someone else finds this useful and saves them the trouble.
Jeremy
On Tue, Aug 28, 2012 at 12:08 PM, Jeremy Levy wrote:
> Also, it doesn't seem as though fileQueueCursor is working as des
t of disk space.
I could get away with the disk space not being cleaned out if it was only
writing to disk once the memory limit was reached but that doesn't seem to
be the case. Any suggestions?
Jeremy
On Tue, Aug 28, 2012 at 11:14 AM, Jeremy Levy wrote:
> Hi Gary-
>
> Tha
ssages see
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AMQ-3780
>
> On 28 August 2012 15:44, Jeremy Levy wrote:
> > When using fileQueueCursor, as I understand it the data is written to the
> > tmp-storage directory. When does this directory get cleaned up. For
> > example I tested putti
ood volume without pooling the connexn factory. I don't
> have numbers just yet but it will be within an order of magnitude of that.
> Mind sharing what message store you are using for persistence and the
> broker topology.
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Jul 20, 2012, at 1
a high performance
> persistent configuration can share their experience and config.
>
> On Fri, Jul 20, 2012 at 11:06 AM, Jeremy Levy wrote:
>
> > Thanks Gaurav-
> >
> > I'll give the Pooled Factory a try. What do you think about keeping once
> > instance o
, dep on your use case, try to turn on async sending if
> possible. There are many perf knobs that can be turned.
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Jul 19, 2012, at 16:32, Jeremy Levy wrote:
>
> > I suspect that the way I am currently producing messages within my
> > ap
I suspect that the way I am currently producing messages within my
application server is wrong.
We using JBoss 5.1 with a standalone ActiveMQ 5.6.0 broker. In regards to
producing messages I am caching a static instance of the
ActiveMQConnectionFactory, everything else
Connection,Session,Destinat
he/activemq/store/MessagePriorityTest.java
>
> On 15 February 2012 20:58, Jeremy Levy wrote:
> > I'm attempting to test JMS Priority with ActiveMQ 5.5.1 without much
> > success and was hoping someone could point out something I am missing.
> >
> > My test case
I'm attempting to test JMS Priority with ActiveMQ 5.5.1 without much
success and was hoping someone could point out something I am missing.
My test case consists of putting 1000 messages on a queue with a priority
(being set on both the producer and the message) of 0. Followed by putting
100 messa
Thanks Gary. See https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AMQ-3368
On Fri, Jun 3, 2011 at 6:44 PM, Gary Tully wrote:
> Think so, it has low impact and gives you value, so go ahead.
> On 3 Jun 2011 20:22, "Jeremy Levy" wrote:
> > Is this useful enough for me to submit a JIRA
Is this useful enough for me to submit a JIRA ticket with the patch?
On Wed, Jun 1, 2011 at 1:25 PM, Jeremy Levy wrote:
> Gary-
>
> Right, exclusive consumer won't work as I still want to have multiple
> consumers.
>
> I don't have a requirement to start these cons
consumer" feature won't cut it as
> you are limited to a single consumer.
>
> How do those consumers eventually get activated, is a restart of the
> container without the property?
>
> Would it make sense to have the property settable via jmx, so an mbean
> on the r
Slightly updated patch, had a typo.
On Wed, Jun 1, 2011 at 9:51 AM, Jeremy Levy wrote:
> We currently deploy our ActiveMQ enabled Message Driven Beans along with
> our larger application inside of an EAR file. This ear file is then
> deployed across multiple application servers. H
this would
be a worthwhile contribution.
Jeremy
--
Jeremy Levy
ng.Thread.run(Thread.java:662)
>
> What causes the activemq to generate several thousand threads for my few
> users?
>
> I allready tried to use dedicatedTaskRunner=false in my broker conf. There
> was no effect.
>
> Greetings,
> Alexander
>
> --
> View this message in context:
> http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/OutOfMemoryError-unable-to-create-new-native-thread-tp3402303p3402303.html
> Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
--
Jeremy Levy
f there will be a 5.4.2?
>
> In the meantime am I okay to stop active mq, remove the previous two
> months of .log files (keeping November) and start the queue?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Matt
>
--
Jeremy Levy
I'm seeing a problem where a Queue is not backed up however the time for the
consumer to actually execute the JMS message is between 100 - 200 seconds
from creation (as measured via the JMSTimestamp-CurrentTime).
The flow was fairly low to the queue, less then 30 messages a minute. I was
able to r
17 matches
Mail list logo
