semog wrote: > > Thanks. A helpful bit of information is a comparison of NMS 1.1 to NMS > 1.0, > since there was some major re-work done on the threading code between the > two versions. Would you be able to test these different configurations? >
I don't think I can do a apples-to-apples comparison because 1.0 was not thread safe due to the sessions collection not being synchronized. To work around this issue, back when we used the NMS 1.0 library we used a separate connection/session for each consumer. Although this is a slight abuse of resources we have a low number of consumers and it was working fine. When we switched to NMS 1.1 (primary motivation was the thread safety) I altered the configuration to share the connection. For testing, I might switch it back to one-connection-per-consumer and see if that changes the behavior we're observing. It might be a week or two before I can spend significant time on this due to other priorities. -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/thread-deadlock-issue-in-NMS-tp20180687p20227395.html Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
