Oops that should have read: "Yep if you kill off the JVM of the broken listener then"
On 3/7/07, rabidgremlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi Hiram, Yep if you kill off the JVM of the broken publisher then things kick back into action.... Not sure this is good "expected behaviour". A misbehaving listener should not stop the publisher or other consumers from working. I would have hoped that the connections between the broker and the publishers and the consumers would be divorced so that this kinda of thing could not happen. Is there a way to configure ActiveMQ to do this ? Perhaps having seperate in-memory queues for consumers or by turning on persistance ? Jonathan On 3/7/07, Hiram Chirino <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > if you kill the JVM of the broken listener does the publisher > un-block? If so then this is the expected behaviour. The reason for > this is that even though the listner is logically broken, (it's not > receiving messages anymore), the broker does not know this since it > still has an active connection with the broker. Furthermore, the > broker is blocking the publisher because it is queueing up messages in > memory for that dead consumer. > >
