I tried this out, it does appear to solve my problem.....Thanks! Can we get it added to the 5.0 release?
Jason hbruch wrote: > > I had problems as well using failover with maxRetryAttempts and > PooledConnections. > Might there be a call missing in FailoverTransport to the > transportListener indicating a finally failed connection? > Find attached a patch I applied successfully to AMQ-4.1.1. ( > http://www.nabble.com/file/p14181174/FailoverTransport.java > FailoverTransport.java ) > > Regards, > Holger > > > James.Strachan wrote: >> >> On 26/11/2007, Jason Rosenberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> >>> I'm curious whether you've found a solution to this. I've seen also >>> that if >>> you use the maxReconnectAttempts, and it fails to reconnect, then the >>> connection cannot be reliably recovered. >> >> If a connection fails to reconnect it must be discarded (along with >> all of its associated resources). e.g. imagine a JDBC connection when >> a database goes down - its of no real use any more >> >> >>> I've tried it with the Jencks AMQPool for my connection pooling, as well >>> as >>> the standard ActiveMQ PooledConnections.... >>> >>> And if you don't use the maxReconnectAttempts flag, then it retries >>> forever, >>> and hangs the client. >>> >>> So, I'd be interested to know if there's a way to have it recover >>> cleanly on >>> failure, but always return quickly to the client if all failover choices >>> have failed.... >> >> Does switching to Spring's MessageListenerContainer stuff instead of >> the Jencks pool help? Basically the pool must ditch the connections, >> sessions & consumers if the connection fails. >> -- >> James >> ------- >> http://macstrac.blogspot.com/ >> >> Open Source Integration >> http://open.iona.com >> >> > > -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Timeout-and-Failover-on-a-queue-tf4652630s2354.html#a14215834 Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
