Hi Filip
I am using topics & no queues.
Is there a way to drop messages for particular consumers / for particular
temporary topics based on certain conditions?
For example, if the message type is of type A or B, don't discard. If
message is of type C, discard.
Can BrokerFilter be used for discarding mesages based on conditions for slow
consumers?
Can policy entry be configured in following way?
<policyEntry
topic="ActiveMQ.Advisory.Consumer.Topic.PRICES.XYZ"
producerFlowControl="false" memoryLimit="5mb">
<destination><topic
name="ID:dcmpdevapp02"/></destination>
<subscriptionRecoveryPolicy>
<queryBasedSubscriptionRecoveryPolicy
query="MType = 'A' OR MType = 'B'" />
</subscriptionRecoveryPolicy>
<pendingMessageLimitStrategy>
<prefetchRatePendingMessageLimitStrategy
multiplier="2"/>
</pendingMessageLimitStrategy>
</policyEntry>
Will configuring the xml be a good substitute than a plugin filter? Or
broker filter will do the same operation effortlessly & it is more flexible
than xml configuration?
Thanks.
Filip Hanik - Dev Lists wrote:
>
> that's absolutely doable, what you'd need to do is set
>
> producerFlowControl="false" on your policy entries,
> that's what we did.
>
> then we setup the pendingMessageLimitStrategy to 1000, and our problem
> was that when a message was discarded it went to the DLQ and eventually
> caused OOME.
>
> The BrokerFilter class (Broker interface) can let you do many different
> things
>
> let me know if you wish to elaborate some more
>
> Filip
>
> Badri wrote:
>> Thanks Filip for taking time & replying.
>>
>> My use case is I have 5 components in my application which are consumers
>> to
>> active mq & receive data through temporary topics. If 1 of the consumer
>> becomes slow, it blocks the publisher. I was thinking of configuring in
>> activemq.xml based on topic / destinations. I was planning to use
>> "pendingMessageLimitStrategy - prefetchRatePendingMessageLimitStrategy
>> &
>> also eviction strategies". By doing this I am hoping that other fast
>> consumers receive data. Do you think plugin filters could also make a
>> difference since this is a data sensitive application?
>>
>> Thanks
>> Badri
>>
>>
>>
>> Filip Hanik - Dev Lists wrote:
>>
>>> Sure Badri,
>>> our use case that we were dropping messages on the broker, so they go to
>>> the Dead Letter Queue (DLQ),
>>> however, for temporary topics, we didn't want that to happen, and since
>>> I wasn't able to configure a policy for temp topics where we could plug
>>> in a discarding DLQ, then we just did it as a plugin.
>>>
>>> The configuration looks like
>>>
>>> <plugins>
>>> <bean
>>> xmlns="http://www.springframework.org/schema/beans";
>>> id="covalentDlqBroker"
>>> class="com.covalent.activemq.discard.CovalentDLQBrokerPlugin">
>>> <property name="dropAll" value="false"/>
>>> <property name="dropTemporaryTopics" value="true"/>
>>> <property name="dropTemporaryQueues" value="true"/>
>>> <!--drops by destination name, using java regular expressions
>>>
>>> http://java.sun.com/j2se/1.5.0/docs/api/java/util/regex/Pattern.html
>>> delimited by spaces, so destination names cannot contain
>>> spaces
>>> -->
>>> <property name="dropOnly" value="some_alarm another_alarm"/>
>>> <!--how frequently do we output how many messages we have
>>> dropped - use 0 for disable-->
>>> <property name="reportInterval" value="1000"/>
>>> </bean>
>>> </plugins>
>>>
>>> The library and source code can be found here
>>> http://people.apache.org/~fhanik/covalent-dlq.jar
>>>
>>> the nice thing with a broker plugin, is that you actually can control a
>>> lot more than just DLQ :)
>>>
>>> hope this helps
>>> Filip
>>>
>>> Badri wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi Filip
>>>>
>>>> Can you give more details about the broker plugin filter?
>>>> I also need to create policy entry for temporary topics.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks for your help & time.
>>>> Badri
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Filip Hanik - Dev Lists wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> I couldn't get that to work properly, I even tried topic="ID>" since
>>>>> that was the prefix, and didn't work either.
>>>>> I worked around the problem by creating a broker plugin filter, and
>>>>> doing my operations in there
>>>>>
>>>>> Filip
>>>>>
>>>>> Hiram Chirino wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> I guess you want an entry for all topics or all queues right (since
>>>>>> the actually names are dynamic)?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> One way to do it might be to use topic='>' since that would match all
>>>>>> topics (temp topics are still topics). But I guess we should have
>>>>>> something a little bette than that.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Fri, May 9, 2008 at 7:45 PM, Filip Hanik - Dev Lists
>>>>>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> is there a way to create a
>>>>>>> <policyEntry> for temporary topics?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Filip
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
--
View this message in context:
http://www.nabble.com/create-policyentry-for-temp-topics-tp17158262p17943349.html
Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
