ion {
>> >>
>> >> connection = connFactory.createTopicConnection();
>> >> session = connection.createSession(false,
>> >> Session.AUTO_ACKNOWLEDGE);
>> >> destination = session.createTopic( dest );
>> >> pr
er = session.createConsumer( destination );
> >>connection.start();
> >>}
> >>
> >>public void addMessageListener( MessageListener listener ) throws
> >> JMSException{
> >>consumer.setMessageListener( listener );
> &g
etMessageListener( listener );
>>}
>>
>> public void sendObject( Serializable object ) throws JMSException{
>>ObjectMessage message = session.createObjectMessage( object );
>>producer.send(message);
>>}
>> }
>> --- END --
>>
>> Thanks for any help you may have...
>>
>
>
--
View this message in context:
http://old.nabble.com/memory-leak-problem-with-ActiveMQ-5.1-tp19910141p29008506.html
Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
It is probably best to open a jira issue and submit a Junit test case
of your client that demonstrates the out of memory error.
2008/11/19 Elihu Smails <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> I am finally getting the chance to continue testing this and am still
> getting OutOfMemory errors on the JVM that is sendi
I am finally getting the chance to continue testing this and am still
getting OutOfMemory errors on the JVM that is sending messages to the
ActiveMQ server. I have set the policy to
on the ActiveMQ server using the
latest code in the trunk.
Anyone have any more ideas on how to prevent these OutO
2008/10/14 Mark Webb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> nevermind, I thought this was a source code change
It was - on trunk
--
James
---
http://macstrac.blogspot.com/
Open Source Integration
http://fusesource.com/
nevermind, I thought this was a source code change
On Tue, Oct 14, 2008 at 1:52 PM, Mark Webb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> on what branch did you check this in on? I just performed an update on the
> trunk and see no changes.
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, Oct 14, 2008 at 10:36 AM, James Strachan <[EMAIL
on what branch did you check this in on? I just performed an update on the
trunk and see no changes.
On Tue, Oct 14, 2008 at 10:36 AM, James Strachan
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:
> 2008/10/14 Mark Webb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> > You would be my new best friend if you did :)
>
> Done! :)
>
> --
> J
2008/10/14 Mark Webb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> You would be my new best friend if you did :)
Done! :)
--
James
---
http://macstrac.blogspot.com/
Open Source Integration
http://fusesource.com/
You would be my new best friend if you did :)
In my opinion, it seems to me like this should be turned off by default and
then the option to turn it on is available. I am hitting OutOfMemory errors
after 10,000 messages, which takes about an hour for me.
On Tue, Oct 14, 2008 at 10:16 AM, James
2008/10/10 Rob Davies <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> That's not a a memory leak you're seeing - that's the wacky Retroactive
> Consumer functionality - see
> http://activemq.apache.org/retroactive-consumer.html
> The default policy is FixedSizeSubscrptionRecoveryPolicy - and the default
> cache size for e
So I would see this increase in memory on the JMS sender? This seems a
little strange. I have tried ActiveMQ 5.2 and see the same problem on the
sending client application.
On Fri, Oct 10, 2008 at 2:39 AM, Rob Davies <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> That's not a a memory leak you're seeing - tha
That's not a a memory leak you're seeing - that's the wacky
Retroactive Consumer functionality - see http://activemq.apache.org/retroactive-consumer.html
The default policy is FixedSizeSubscrptionRecoveryPolicy - and the
default cache size for each topic in 5.1 is about 6mb. I'd suggest
conf
I have run across a memory leak that I have been able to reproduce. I
am profiling the sample application in NetBeans and I believe that I
have traced the problem to
org.apache.activemq.openwire.v3.BaseDataStreamMarshaller.tightUnmarshalByteSequence(DataInput,
BooleanStream)
The sample program is
14 matches
Mail list logo
