Tim , Thank you for your suggestion. But i have tried different way now to
see the result. It worked out. I have created a new maven project with only
producer and consumer and the old project contains unnecessary dependencies
which might have caused the issue. As soon as i have tried with the new
If you switch your acknowledgement mode to AUTO_ACKNOWLEDGE and comment out
your call to message.acknowledge(), does the behavior change? Client ack
mode isn't very widely used, so it's possible there's a bug in the
interaction between it and failover.
Also, in your original post, you said that t
Hi Tim ,
I am sorry that one was the outdated consumer , I have changed it long time
back and forgot to update the gist. Yes i have tried yourway but the same
result.
Thanks,
Akhil.
--
View this message in context:
http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/JMS-exception-during-the-Failover-tp471
The catch block in your consumer looks very suspicious, since it starts
additional consumers without closing the previous ones. Would you please
comment out the line that's there, and also add a line to log the exception
you're catching?
Tim
On Sep 20, 2016 11:16 AM, "akhil" wrote:
> Hi Tim ,
Hi Tim ,
I have tried with the graceful shutdown by not using kill any more but still
it's on the same way of dealing the consumer thread block.
you can find the new switch log here :
https://gist.github.com/areddy7021/e0e3a6c89fc974ce3031e326c060acca
I have switched like this way ..started wit
Thank You Tim ..I am just doing kill now on the activemq process instead of
service shut down. I can try the service shutdown as per your suggestion.
When i get into this state like the consumer idle or inactivity state ..from
consumer point there is no activity though we switch broker from B to A.
Am I right in understanding that you're no longer having the problem from
your first email, and the problem from yesterday is the only one?
When you stop the broker, how are you stopping it? If you're doing kill
-9, that doesn't gracefully shut down the TCP connections, so the behavior
can be dif
Hi , I am having the same type of issue but with the different configuration.
I have two brokers which are not in network but i am using producer and
consumer with two different threads in my local and trying to hit 10k
messages and consume it from second thread. I am using the shared file
storage
