On 3/28/07, osian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
This has now been rectified, it was a bug in how the JMSXMessageGroupID was
being generated, now that it is generated properly, all is well,
Great, thanks for letting us know!
--
James
---
http://radio.weblogs.com/0112098/
This has now been rectified, it was a bug in how the JMSXMessageGroupID was
being generated, now that it is generated properly, all is well,
Thanks,
Osh
--
View this message in context:
http://www.nabble.com/Out-Of-Order-Message-Processing-tf3446025s2354.html#a9708365
Sent from the ActiveMQ - U
On 3/22/07, osian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I have noticed that for 2 of the sets of messages, the JMSXGroupID was
generated slightly differently, because they didn't have as much information
as the other messages, I am amending this, and running the test again. But,
with this in mind, these m
I have noticed that for 2 of the sets of messages, the JMSXGroupID was
generated slightly differently, because they didn't have as much information
as the other messages, I am amending this, and running the test again. But,
with this in mind, these messages with the smaller group ID were processe
