Hi James, Theoretically the prefetch should not cause such problem. If it does, its a bug.
On Nov 5, 2012, at 11:29 AM, James Green wrote: > Torsten, All our brokers are on 5.7.0. > > I'm wondering if this is to do with a Stomp client which specifies a > prefetch limit of 200 which processes 200 msgs then disconnects. It is > invoked by a scheduled job manager. I've changed this prefetch limit 1 now > to see if it makes a difference under load this week. > > > On 5 November 2012 10:18, Torsten Mielke <tors...@fusesource.com> wrote: > >> What version of ActiveMQ are you using? >> There have been a number of bug fixes around duplicate detection in the >> past few releases. >> Perhaps you got some duplicate messages in your store that the cursor >> would not dispatch because it detected them as duplicates. >> This should generally not happen, the duplicate should not get written to >> the store in the first place. >> >> If you're not at the latest and greatest version of ActiveMQ, I would >> suggest to upgrade. >> Otherwise it would be interesting to find out how to reproduce the problem >> so that it can be analyzed further. >> >> Regards, >> >> Torsten Mielke >> tors...@fusesource.com >> tmielke.blogspot.com >> >> >> >> On Nov 2, 2012, at 4:20 PM, James Green wrote: >> >>> I restarted AMQ. The counter remains at 55. Browsing, I now see messages! >>> >>> They are 40 minutes old and have redelivery true. Is there anything more >>> that can be suggested as a result? >>> >>> >>> >>> On 2 November 2012 15:14, James Green <james.mk.gr...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>>> I am looking at the web console and the JMX connection which tell me >> that >>>> a queue has 55 pending messages. >>>> >>>> If I click in the web console to browse them, an empty list is >> displayed. >>>> >>>> If I click any of the browseX() methods of the JMX console, I get an >> empty >>>> dialog back. The cursorSize() returns 55, >> doesCursorHaveMessagesBuffered() >>>> returns false. >>>> >>>> Is this a known problem? Can it be explained sensibly? >>>> >>>> Thanks, >>>> >>>> James
