If you ultimately find that ActiveMQ 5.x can't meet your performance goals,
then I would recommend you checkout ActiveMQ Artemis. It supports all the
same protocols as the 5.x broker (i.e. OpenWire, AMQP, STOMP, MQTT) and
much of the same features (or equivalents) but it is based on a higher
perfor
I've never run the broker in that mode, but I'd expect that one major
determiner of your throughput would be the speed at which the disk can do
the frequent, small flushes to disk. I'd expect you to see the best
performance on a locally-attached SSD with low write latency, but it's
possible that yo
You might also look at Christian Posta's blog post to see if any of those
ideas and techniques would be of use for your situation:
http://blog.christianposta.com/activemq/speeding-up-activemq-persistent-messaging-performance-by-25x/
Tim
On Wed, Dec 19, 2018, 11:45 AM Tim Bain I've never run the
Hi Tim!
Thank you very much for your answer!
Yes, I was using non-durable subscription on my topic. When I changed to
durable subscription, It didn't lose messages if I use sync sends. The main
problem now is the sending response time. It spends too much time sending
messages. Is there any way to
You're using a non-durable subscription on your topic, aren't you? That's
your (primary) problem: you're losing messages around the time of the
failover because your consumer isn't subscribed during that period of time.
It's possible that the broker is actually losing a few messages, especially
if
Hi Tim!
My sender app is sending text messages with the text: "Message (sequence)".
The sender's log is showing the message after send it. This is the log:
Message 6291
Message 6292
Message 6293
Message 6294
Message 6295
2018-12-10 10:37:43.175 WARN 8732 --- [.45:61626@55241]
o.a.a.t.failover.Fa
Hi Tim!
The lost messages are last few messages before the failover.
I'm trying to simulate energy failure, so I kill the broker ungracefully
(kill -9).
Due to my requirements, I need to use async sends. Could this be a problem?
I realized that If I reduce timeout to 1 ms no messages are lost.
Can you please characterize the messages that are lost? Do you lose the
last few messages sent before the failover, or one here and there, or...?
Also, are you killing the broker gracefully (sending it a stop command) or
ungracefully (kill -9, etc.)? Might the messages that are lost simply be
the
Hi Tim!
Sorry about the late answer. I fixed the configuration and now I have a
master/slave that work fine. But I still lose messages. I checked the
consumer connection and It is equal than the producer. Moreover when I
disconnect master broker consumer and producer reconnect to the slave
broker.
You would use masterslave for connections to a master/slave cluster from
another broker. So if broker C was connecting to the master/slave pair A/B,
then C would use a masterslave networkConnector to A/B. But A and B would
have no networkConnector to each other, and no masterslave
networkConnectors
Hi Tim!
Ok, so for a HA ActiveMQ master-slave is not required any network of
brokers, isn't it?
For the messages we are losing. We see that all messages are sent but when
failover happens consumer stops listening messages. Does It makes sense with
a wrong configuration?
Thanks for your answer!
Actually, you should be able to set the alwaysSyncSend via the URI by
adding &jms.alwaysSyncSend=true to the end of your producer's URI, so you
should be able to continue using JmsTemplate.
Tim
On Fri, Nov 30, 2018, 7:30 AM Tim Bain You're mixing your paradigms.
>
> The persistenceAdapter portio
You're mixing your paradigms.
The persistenceAdapter portion of your config is all you need for a
master/slave cluster, *as long as* your activemq.data variable resolves to
the same value in both processes. (Both processes run on the same machine,
right?) If so, the second broker started will paus
We have used Spring boot to develop sender and consumer apps.
*SENDER:*
To send messages we used and API REST that sends 5000 messages to a topic.
If some convertAndSend fails (ActiveMQ node 1 killed) we retry it until the
failover.
This is my sender class:
@RestController
public class RestApiC
ActiveMQ 5.x does support high availability via a master-slave
configuration. See the documentation [1] for more details.
Justin
[1] http://activemq.apache.org/masterslave.html
On Thu, Nov 29, 2018 at 11:09 AM PedroRP
wrote:
> Hi!
>
> Does ActiveMQ cluster (master-slave) offer high availabili
Hi!
Does ActiveMQ cluster (master-slave) offer high availability on failover
mode?
I am publishing messages on a topic but when I kill active node and my
consumer connect to the other node It loses several messages.
I need only topic mode, because I need to have different pods of the same
opensh
Hi!
Does ActiveMQ cluster (master-slave) offer high availability on failover
mode?
I am publishing messages on a topic but when I kill active node and my
consumer connect to the other node It loses several messages.
I need only topic mode, because I need to have different pods of the same
opensh
17 matches
Mail list logo
