AMQ Store is the combination of the journal (which itself now uses
Kaha) and Kaha to store message references
cheers,
Rob
http://rajdavies.blogspot.com/
On Oct 4, 2007, at 8:04 PM, Daryl Richter wrote:
On Oct 3, 2007, at 7:30 AM, Rob Davies wrote:
Do you get the same using AMQ store (the default in 5.0) - its the
prefered store over kaha in ActiveMQ 5.0
Hmm. When I start a very recent (revision 581630) build of
ActiveMQ with completely default config I get (among others) the
following lines in my log:
INFO KahaStore - Kaha Store using data
directory /usr/local/apache/activemq-5.0-581630/data/localhost/kr-
store/state
INFO AMQPersistenceAdapter - Active data files: []
WARN AMQPersistenceAdapter - The ReferenceStore is not
valid - recovering ...
INFO KahaStore - Kaha Store successfully
deleted data directory /usr/local/apache/activemq-5.0-581630/data/
localhost/kr-store/data
INFO AMQPersistenceAdapter - Journal Recovery Started
from: DataManager:(data-)
INFO AMQPersistenceAdapter - Recovered 0 operations from
redo log in 0.0080 seconds.
INFO AMQPersistenceAdapter - Finished recovering the
ReferenceStore
INFO KahaStore - Kaha Store using data
directory /usr/local/apache/activemq-5.0-581630/data/localhost/kr-
store/data
So, which do I have? AMQStore or Kaha?
cheers,
Rob
http://rajdavies.blogspot.com/
On Oct 3, 2007, at 8:50 AM, David Sitsky wrote:
I have discovered an issue with the latest activemq 5.0 (revision
581510) which seems to have been present for some time, at least
for the last month.
I have an application using transactions, and kaha persistence,
and two consumers feeding off a queue.
I sometimes see the same message being sent to two consumers.
All transactions were committed (no rollbacks), and as you can
see by the debug dump, the message has the same message-ID, but
was delivered to two separate consumers, running on separate
threads, using sync receives with a prefetch of 0, with separate
sessions of course.
Is this a known problem? It doesn't always happen - seems to be
a race condition. If I turn off persistence, I don't seem to see
it.
Here is the message being delivered to consumer 1:
2007-10-03 17:21:37,310 [Worker 060bacd87f4a40a4867113e2e3e553dd]
85475 DEBUG org.apache.activemq.ActiveMQMessageConsumer -
ID:tamarama-62436-1191396093006-2:2:3:2 received message:
MessageDispatch {commandId = 0, responseRequired = false,
consumerId = ID:tamarama-62436-1191396093006-2:2:3:2, destination
= queue://worker-items, message = ActiveMQObjectMessage
{commandId = 50, responseRequired = false, messageId =
ID:tamarama-62436-1191396093006-2:2:1:3:1, originalDestination =
null, originalTransactionId = null, producerId =
ID:tamarama-62436-1191396093006-2:2:1:3, destination = queue://
worker-items, transactionId =
TX:ID:tamarama-62436-1191396093006-2:2:5, expiration = 0,
timestamp = 1191396097286, arrival = 0, brokerInTime =
1191396097290, brokerOutTime = 1191396097303, correlationId =
null, replyTo = null, persistent = true, type = null, priority =
4, groupID = null, groupSequence = 0, targetConsumerId = null,
compressed = false, userID = null, content =
[EMAIL PROTECTED],
marshalledProperties = null, dataStructure = null,
redeliveryCounter = 0, size = 0, properties = null,
readOnlyProperties = true, readOnlyBody = true, droppable =
false}, redeliveryCounter = 0}
Here is the same message (check the message ID) being delivered
to consumer 2:
2007-10-03 17:21:37,422 [Worker 2c3169d1726b4781a423a239f65c7bd1]
85587 DEBUG org.apache.activemq.ActiveMQMessageConsumer -
ID:tamarama-62436-1191396093006-2:2:1:2 received message:
MessageDispatch {commandId = 0, responseRequired = false,
consumerId = ID:tamarama-62436-1191396093006-2:2:1:2, destination
= queue://worker-items, message = ActiveMQObjectMessage
{commandId = 50, responseRequired = false, messageId =
ID:tamarama-62436-1191396093006-2:2:1:3:1, originalDestination =
null, originalTransactionId = null, producerId =
ID:tamarama-62436-1191396093006-2:2:1:3, destination = queue://
worker-items, transactionId =
TX:ID:tamarama-62436-1191396093006-2:2:5, expiration = 0,
timestamp = 1191396097286, arrival = 0, brokerInTime =
1191396097290, brokerOutTime = 1191396097417, correlationId =
null, replyTo = null, persistent = true, type = null, priority =
4, groupID = null, groupSequence = 0, targetConsumerId = null,
compressed = false, userID = null, content =
[EMAIL PROTECTED],
marshalledProperties = null, dataStructure = null,
redeliveryCounter = 0, size = 0, properties = null,
readOnlyProperties = true, readOnlyBody = true, droppable =
false}, redeliveryCounter = 0}
I'll need to do more investigations tomorrow, but if anybody has
any ideas, I'd appreciate some insights.
--
Cheers,
David
Nuix Pty Ltd
Suite 79, 89 Jones St, Ultimo NSW 2007, Australia Ph: +61 2
9280 0699
Web: http://www.nuix.com Fax: +61 2
9212 6902
--
Daryl
http://itsallsemantics.com
"I see this as coming down to mutual respect. I want to respect the
others I communicate with enough to tell them my truth without
reservation and I want to respect them enough to listen to their
truth. I want to respect their good intentions enough to believe
that we can work past our disagreements."
-- Kent Beck, 2006
