't use a messagelistener
> directly. via spring the listener does a receive(...) under the hood
> so it will be ok with prefetch=0
>
> On 14 November 2013 16:14, Ned Wolpert wrote:
> > After I say you wrote 'prefetchExtension=false' I looked it up and found
> > this bug
nsactions
> - the prefetch will be deferred till the ack which will be later than
> in the auto ack case. Also, in the transacted case, use the
> destination policy prefetchExtension=false
>
> On 13 November 2013 14:54, Ned Wolpert wrote:
> > Did anyone have an idea into what
, 2013 at 9:40 AM, Ned Wolpert wrote:
> Forgot to add, broker url only has one query param
>
> jms.prefetchPolicy.queuePrefetch=1
>
> which, as I mentioned above, does seem to work.
>
>
> On Tue, Nov 5, 2013 at 10:56 AM, Ned Wolpert wrote:
>
>> I can see the
Forgot to add, broker url only has one query param
jms.prefetchPolicy.queuePrefetch=1
which, as I mentioned above, does seem to work.
On Tue, Nov 5, 2013 at 10:56 AM, Ned Wolpert wrote:
> I can see the preFetch values being set in the console, and they are all
> one. I'
27;ve
> configured are being honored by the broker? Are consumer priorities in
> use? Are your consumers instances of the same executable or are they
> implemented individually?
>
> Can you post your broker configuration: activemq.xml?
>
> How are your clients implemented, e.g., tech
protocol version)
> so in theory the broker will be backward compatible with older
> clients. Just make sure the activemq-openwire-legacy jar is on the
> classpath (should be by default).
>
> Of course I would test this out to make sure :)
>
> On Mon, Nov 4, 2013 at 10:20 AM, Ne
.9. I haven't started the process of
testing, but I wanted to see if this is a case where the 5.3 clients need
to be upgraded at the same time as the server, or if the clients can be
rolled over a few weeks to 5.9 after the server gets updated?
Thanks!
--
Virtually, Ned Wolpert
"Set
hould work as you expect
> it. See http://activemq.apache.org/what-is-the-prefetch-limit-for.html
>
> Mario
>
> On 10/2/07, Ned Wolpert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Folks-
> >
> > I'm trying to see how to best configure an ActiveMQ instance, but I
> >
ter load balance the clients? I tested this behavior with
4.1.1 and 5.0 snapshot with the same outcome.
Thanks!
--
Virtually, Ned Wolpert
http://www.codeheadsystems.com/blog/
"Settle thy studies, Faustus, and begin..." --Marlowe
