new snapshot to test.
>>
>> Again: thanks for your "huge" patience.
>>
>> Francesco!
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> View this message in context: http://activemq.2283324.n4.nab
>> ble.com/ARTEMIS-bad-performance-behaviour-after-7-10-days-
>> of-usage-tp4721272p4721911.html
>> Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>>
>
>
test.
>
> Again: thanks for your "huge" patience.
>
> Francesco!
>
>
>
>
> --
> View this message in context: http://activemq.2283324.n4.
> nabble.com/ARTEMIS-bad-performance-behaviour-after-7-10-days-of-usage-
> tp4721272p4721911.html
> Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
Super,
you'd be so kind (as usual)!
I'll wait for a feedback on this new snapshot to test.
Again: thanks for your "huge" patience.
Francesco!
--
View this message in context:
http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/ARTEMIS-bad-performance-behaviour-after-7-10-days-of-usa
=
> ly I'm not yet able to identify the exact steps to reproduce it. I'm
> curren=
> tly committed exactly on this. I'll let you know as s threaddumps.tdump
> <http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/file/n4721908/threaddumps.tdump>
> oon
> as I can.
>
> Mea
/n4721908/threaddumps.tdump> oon
as I can.
Meanwhile: have you any idea?
Francesco
--
View this message in context:
http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/ARTEMIS-bad-performance-behaviour-after-7-10-days-of-usage-tp4721272p4721908.html
Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
___
> From: Francesco PADOVANI
> Sent: Friday, February 10, 2017 2:58:19 PM
> To: users@activemq.apache.org
> Subject: Re: ARTEMIS: bad-performance behaviour after 7-10 days of usage
>
>
> Hi Martyn,
>
> we're testing your 1.6.0 snapshot.
>
> The issues rela
: Francesco PADOVANI
Sent: Friday, February 10, 2017 2:58:19 PM
To: users@activemq.apache.org
Subject: Re: ARTEMIS: bad-performance behaviour after 7-10 days of usage
Hi Martyn,
we're testing your 1.6.0 snapshot.
The issues related to retained messages ACK and durable queues seem ok now.
Grea
advance.
Francesco
From: Martyn Taylor
Sent: Thursday, February 9, 2017 5:36:19 PM
To: users@activemq.apache.org
Subject: Re: ARTEMIS: bad-performance behaviour after 7-10 days of usage
On Thu, Feb 9, 2017 at 3:54 PM, Francesco PADOVANI <
francesco.padov...@bticino.
__
> From: Martyn Taylor
> Sent: Thursday, February 9, 2017 1:22:52 PM
> To: users@activemq.apache.org
> Subject: Re: ARTEMIS: bad-performance behaviour after 7-10 days of usage
>
> Francesco,
>
> I think I've identified the cause of this probl
1:22:52 PM
To: users@activemq.apache.org
Subject: Re: ARTEMIS: bad-performance behaviour after 7-10 days of usage
Francesco,
I think I've identified the cause of this problem. There were two issues
which are now fixed as part of:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/1002
I
ne substitutes the previous on the queue).
> Is not so? I'm wrong somewhere?
>
> Again, thanks for your patience.
>
> Francesco
>
>
>
> --
> View this message in context: http://activemq.2283324.n4.
> nabble.com/ARTEMIS-bad-performance-behaviour-after-7-10-days-of-usage-
> tp4721272p4721678.html
> Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
- retained messages are removed from address when a new one arrives (and the
reference to the new one substitutes the previous on the queue).
Is not so? I'm wrong somewhere?
Again, thanks for your patience.
Francesco
--
View this message in context:
http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com
itto_sub -h -q 2 -i -t
> /cro/plantid/000/gwid/1/device_state
> --> received:
> *test non retained
> test retained
> test retained
> test retained
> test retained*
> ...
> and so on.
>
> If you agree, I would open a bug for this.
>
> Francesco
>
>
>
> --
> View this message in context: http://activemq.2283324.n4.
> nabble.com/ARTEMIS-bad-performance-behaviour-after-7-10-days-of-usage-
> tp4721272p4721562.html
> Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
evice_state
--> received:
*test non retained
test retained
test retained
test retained
test retained*
...
and so on.
If you agree, I would open a bug for this.
Francesco
--
View this message in context:
http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/ARTEMIS-bad-performance-behaviour-after-7-10-days-of-
environment on AWS, accessible to
> everyone of the community ...this way I hope you'll be able to help me to
> debug and solve the problem.
>
> Thanks
>
> Francesco
>
>
>
> --
> View this message in context:
> http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/ARTEMIS-bad-p
this message in context:
http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/ARTEMIS-bad-performance-behaviour-after-7-10-days-of-usage-tp4721272p4721470.html
Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
configuration (apart
> the acceptor for mqtt of course). Hope can help:
>
> *
>
>
> jms.queue.DLQ
> jms.queue.ExpiryQueue
> 0
>
> -1
>
> 10
> PAGE
> true
>
-1
10
PAGE
true
*
Francesco
--
View this message in context:
http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/ARTEMIS-bad-performance-behaviour-after-7-10-days-of-usage-tp4721272p4721417.html
Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
ntid.1074918.gwid.33300.device_profile.02" travel only retained
> messages, I thought that at anytime there could be at most only 1 message
> per time (because the next retained will substitute the previous one)...
> It's not so?
> And also here: why durable true? Because QoS2? Does "durable=true" mean that
> these messages will persist in memory forever?
>
> sorry for these patches of information ...but the result of "data print"
> command was too big for an upload.
> Anyway, hope can help you to help me.
>
> Francesco
>
>
>
>
> --
> View this message in context:
> http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/ARTEMIS-bad-performance-behaviour-after-7-10-days-of-usage-tp4721272p4721395.html
> Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
--
Clebert Suconic
rable true? Because QoS2? Does "durable=true" mean that
these messages will persist in memory forever?
sorry for these patches of information ...but the result of "data print"
command was too big for an upload.
Anyway, hope can help you to help me.
Francesco
--
View this
A question. Are u consuming from the subscriptions or u intend to leave
them hinging?
While paging. Do u need transactions? If u start to page not using
transactions would make paging to act like partitions on Kafka.
I will be waiting for more data from you before we can help some more.
On
An easy way to check what is going on is with
Artemis data print
(Preferably with the broker stopped)
You can then check what is not being asked and why it became paging.
You could maybe replicate a similar load pattern on a test? Like sending
many messages a second instead of 2 per minute
Hello,
I'm using Apache Artemis as MQTT broker for our IOT projects.
It's a clean Artemis installation of version 1.5.1., on a server (CentOS 7)
which has 2 vCPU, 8 GB of RAM (4GB of Heap Space dedicated to Artemis) and 50
GB of SSD data disk.
After the installation of artemis Broker we started t
23 matches
Mail list logo
