NVD - CVE-2023-46604 (nist.gov)<https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2023-46604>
Using Artemis in some of my applications. Can someone please verify if the
above vulnerability impacts Artemis at all? And if so, which versions?
Kind Regards,
Adam Zie
element of the document is not
.
I thought it will pick up XML schema from previous version.
Any suggestions on that matter?
Thanks,
Adam
one thing to note ... we were using the /admin/xml/queues.jsp page to get
stats from ActiveMQ into splunk for monitoring and alerting. We've worked
around the issue by using the jolokia endpoint, e.g.:
/api/jolokia/read/org.apache.activemq:type=Broker,brokerName=*,destinationName=*,destinationType
I'm also using Java 1.8 ... with both 5.13.3 and 5.14.5
Also, to Tim's earlier request, I deleted all the queues (using the
/admin/queues.jsp page) and still got the same error when I went to the
/admin/xml/queues/jsp page.
I'll filed a JIRA: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AMQ-6685
--
V
We just upgraded from 5.13.3 to 5.14.5 and now when we try to get queue stats
form /admin/xml/queues.jsp we get a page with the following errors:
/This page contains the following errors:
error on line 4 at column 666: Namespace prefix c on forEach is not defined
error on line 5 at column 14: Une
We ran a couple tests with conduitSubscriptions="true" and
decreaseNetworkConsumerPriority="true".
The first test we had 3 brokers, 2 producers, and 4 consumers hosts ... and
made sure that each broker had at least 1 consumer host connected ... and
everything kept up just fine.
We ran again with
ok, we re-ran the test with 3 brokers, 2 producer hosts, and 4 consumer hosts
(each consumer host has 50 consumers on a single connection) and this time
with the proper configs on the consumer side and the system behaved a little
better, but still started queueing on the broker at about 500 tps. Si
oops, sorry about the last post ... the test with the 3 brokers, 2 producers,
and 4 consumers had a bad configuration on the consumer side (something
outside the scope of ActiveMQ) ... we're running that same test again (with
conduitSubscriptions="false" and decreasNetworkConsumerPriority="false")
Tim,
We just ran another test with all 3 brokers, 2 producer hosts, and 4
consumer hosts ... and made sure that every broker had at least one consumer
host directly connected ... and we saw the queues on broker1 build up
immediately - event during the "ramp up" portion of the test. We're going to
I'm having a similar issue with 5.13.3. We have 3 brokers configured as a
grid network (each connected to the other 2). For the clients, we are using
JmsTemplate to produce messages from 2 hosts ... and
DefaultMessageListenerContainer to consume from another 2 hosts. Each
consumer client is a singl
ter a new deployment.
Thanks,
adam
--
View this message in context:
http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/Activemq-health-tp4675512p4721282.html
Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
ok, I've done a little further reading here:
https://zookeeper.apache.org/doc/trunk/zookeeperProgrammers.html
and realized that the ZooKeeper server will negotiate the actual timeout
with the client, so even if zkSessionTimeout on the ActiveMQ side is set to
2s ... if the "tick time" on the ZooKee
benefits/drawbacks of
increasing zkSessionTimeout 4s, or 5s (while leaving zk's "tick time" at
2s)?
Thanks,
adam
--
View this message in context:
http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/need-help-understanding-zkSessionTimeout-tp4718772.html
Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
activemq-vip:61616)", and the broker-side transport
connector has "updateClusterClients" and "rebalanceClusterClients" set to
true, then the broker and client would exchange info about the network
topology and clients would reconnect directly to active brokers should the
init
I have an HA cluster (currently version 5.13.3) using replicated leveldb and
I want to put the cluster behind an F5 so that clients only need to know the
VIP on the F5, and the F5 forwards the client to the current live "master".
This way, if I change my broker topology (e.g. add another HA cluster
question
– since spring just deals with the JMS interface and not the “cleanup” method.
Thanks in advance for any advice or tips you can give.
Adam
on two machines.
(I tried discovery over multicast and transport over tcp and this worked)
Adam Kędziora
Software developer / Projektant-programista
PSI Polska Sp. z o.o.
ul. Towarowa 35
61-896 Poznań
Polska
Tel. / Phone:
Fax: +48 61 6556-555
akedzi...@psi.pl
www.psi.pl
Wpisano do rejestru
Alternatively,the only reason we have to have two different networkConnectors
right now is so that we can vary the settings of conduitSubscriptions for
queues vs topics. Is there maybe a way we could rework that configuration
so that we can have different conduitSubscription settings for each kin
standing.
I am happy to provide a patch here, but I am not sure what the right thing
to do is. Extra config? Fix the filtering?
-adam
--
View this message in context:
http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/Duplicate-messages-on-temporary-Topics-tp3209648p3214984.html
Sent from the ActiveMQ - Us
Some further information: In the DemandForwardBridgeSupport, temporary
destinations are not processed as part of the "excludedDestinations' config.
Therefore, in the above set of networkConnectors, temporary destinations are
processed for BOTH connectors instead of just the one for topics.
We ca
ings:
Not sure where to look on this one. Any help would be much appreciated.
-adam
--
View this message in context:
http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/Duplicate-messages-on-temporary-Topics-tp3209648p3209648.html
Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Issue created:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AMQ-3129
--
View this message in context:
http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/conduit-subscriptions-vs-full-duplex-on-network-connections-tp3208138p3209598.html
Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
is the only solution
to have explicit network connections back from the other end?
-adam
--
View this message in context:
http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/conduit-subscriptions-vs-full-duplex-on-network-connections-tp3208138p3208138.html
Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
with each other and we
want to prevent someone from instantiating their own broker and peering
(network of brokers) with our "locked down" brokers without permission. Our
plan was to use SSL client certificates and the JASS authentication on the
signer name. Is there another way?
-ada
nnector to work or ssl networkConnector
to work, but not both at the same time with required certificate auth.
Any help would be very appreciated!
-adam
--
View this message in context:
http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/Different-SSL-Certificates-for-transportConnector-vs-networ
e recovery and consumer communication so that they can all
happen concurrently.
Any pointers would be greatly appreciated here.
-adam
--
View this message in context:
http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/Problem-with-long-replay-retroactive-topic-recovery-tp3079446p3079446.html
Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
brokers where the producer and consumer might not be on the same broker.
Is this possible? I am coding inside the broker, so I do have access to
more
internals that just javax.jms objects.
thanks,
-adam
--
View this message in context:
http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/Forcing-a-producer-to-stop
I have traced this a bit more and the problem is bigger than I thought. What
I am seeing is that while SubscriptionRecoveryPolicy is running, a lock is
taken out that prevents ANY producer or consumer from being added or removed
from BrokerRegion.
Note that this prevents ANY connection to the br
ry path I have tried creates a deadlock.
Is there any explanation somewhere about all the locking going on here?
Isn't it a concern that a blocking thread in a recovery locks up the entire
broker? What if a recovery takes a long time?
Maybe there's a way around all of that?
thanks,
I'm not attached to this methodology. I just want to create a temp
topic and
consume from it. I don't care how :)
So what's the right way to do this? There is an easy way to send messages
via the
broker object, but nothing for consumers that I can find. Any help is much
appreciated!
do something like this (for
example custom destination parameters, etc)?
What about the long term archiving? Is it possible to break out the
persistence mechanism by destination?
Thanks,
-adam
--
View this message in context:
http://old.nabble.com/Long-term-and-elective-durability
the rest of the application.
Is this possible?
This will be relatively low-volume, so I'm not too concerned about
throughput and latency. I'm more interested in ensuring transactional
integrity without XA transactions.
Please let me know if you have any suggestions or tips.
Thanks!
-A
I hate to post such a vague question, but I'm totally confused at this
point and could really use some direction.
I have design where I need to have multiple brokers peered with each-
other, as in the "network of brokers" paradigm. The design requires
that I use the "virtual topics" feature
On 11-Mar-08, at 10:01 AM, James Strachan wrote:
I have been confused on this list before, but here I am again. :-)
I need to configure my brokers to fault-tolerant in a two-node
cluster. I'm configuring this directly inside Spring.
I believe I need to use some form of auto-discovery, journaled
On 11-Mar-08, at 10:01 AM, James Strachan wrote:
I have been confused on this list before, but here I am again. :-)
I need to configure my brokers to fault-tolerant in a two-node
cluster. I'm configuring this directly inside Spring.
I believe I need to use some form of auto-discovery, journaled
I have been confused on this list before, but here I am again. :-)
I need to configure my brokers to fault-tolerant in a two-node
cluster. I'm configuring this directly inside Spring.
I believe I need to use some form of auto-discovery, journaled
persistence and clustering, but after readin
On Oct 12, 2007, at 13:09, Adam Sherman wrote:
On Oct 12, 2007, at 10:31, James Strachan wrote:
To get things going and to avoid you having to worry about how to use
the JMS API properly and so forth I'd recommend you experiment with
the Bean Integration in Camel...
I'm not cle
what Camel actually is though. Going to go watch
your screencast now.
A.
--
Adam Sherman
Technologist
+1 (613) 797-6819 | http://www.sherman.ca/ | sip:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
ventually
add more.) My understanding of "topics" is that you can't force only
a single subscriber to handle each message.
Any thoughts/comments/suggestions you can provide would be very helpful.
Thank you,
A.
--
Adam Sherman
Technologist
+1 (613) 797-6819 | http://www.sherman.ca/ | sip:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
ession and consumer everytime its polls.
Adam Lewandowski wrote:
At what level does the redelivery policy get applied? I've got a
transactional consumer (Spring MDP) that is performing a rollback and I
am expecting the message to be redelivered a maximum number of times as
specified on
At what level does the redelivery policy get applied? I've got a
transactional consumer (Spring MDP) that is performing a rollback and I
am expecting the message to be redelivered a maximum number of times as
specified on the connection factory's redelivery policy. After the
maximum retry attem
Found an existing open issue for this, AMQ-1116. I've submitted a patch
for it, slightly different than the patch already on the ticket. Any
chance it can be included in the next release?
Adam Lewandowski wrote:
I'm using Spring's DefaultMessageListenerContainer inside of
loop, but I'm not sure how to accomplish
that or if I do that it will ever acquire the reconnectMutex lock in
time to do anything.
Thanks,
Adam Lewandowski
Geoffrey De Smet wrote:
My xsd is a copy from
http://picorg.net/schema/activemq-4.1-working-V4.2.xsd
Where in my jar should I drop it? In the META-INF directory?
With kind regards,
Geoffrey De Smet
The spring.schemas file goes in META-INF, the xsd file goes somewhere on
the classpath. So if
the schema to make it work, but I've decided to hold off on
using the Spring schema support for now until it's usable out of the box.
See the thread at
http://www.nabble.com/Spring-2.0-schema-support-tf3411001s2354.html for
more details.
Adam Lewandowski
James Strachan wrote:
> The XML looks fine; it looks like the XSD is not using optional
> attributes. Which version are you using?
apache-activemq-4.1-20070315.010452-12.zip , from the snapshot repository.
ttp://activemq.org/config/1.0":taskRunnerFactory,
WC[##other:"http://activemq.org/config/1.0"]}' is expected.
Does anyone see anything wrong with the broker definition? Or is this a
schema issue?
Thanks,
Adam Lewandowski
not an option for me since the actual publishing
code is inside of Spring's JmsTemplate class which doesn't use that idiom.
Adam Lewandowski wrote:
>
> PooledSession does not appear to use the Topic supplied to the
> createPublisher(topic) method, at least when obtained fr
PooledSession does not appear to use the Topic supplied to the
createPublisher(topic) method, at least when obtained from
PooledConnectionFactory.
When the publish(Message) method is called on the returned
TopicPublisher instance, an UnsupportedOperationException is thrown ("A
destination must
49 matches
Mail list logo
