Well, you have to make sure messages are getting bridged properly (take a
close look at the bridge logging output) and are not bouncing back and
forth for some reason.
On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 12:27 AM, Praveen Bysani <praveen.ii...@gmail.com>wrote:
> Hi Christian,
>
> Thank you for the clarification. What are the factors in activemq that
> could effect this, other than time to live that is set in the publisher ? I
> have a time to live of 2 minutes currently, how can i ensure that most
> messages are delivered before expiry ?
>
> On 15 July 2013 20:04, Christian Posta <christian.po...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Yes, that's what it means.
> >
> > On Sunday, July 14, 2013, Praveen Bysani wrote:
> >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > I observed a lot of following messages in my log,
> > >
> > > 2013-07-15 03:48:22,399 | DEBUG | Message expired ActiveMQBytesMessage
> > > {commandId = 1498, responseRequired = false, messageId =
> > > d7dfc864-e46a-44b0-a0ec-b5d9e3a07127:1:1:253, originalDestination =
> null,
> > > originalTransactionId = null, producerId = ID:global-desktop,
> > destination =
> > > topic://DM, transactionId = null, expiration = 1373831265580,
> timestamp =
> > > 1373831145580, arrival = 0, brokerInTime = 1373831302399,
> brokerOutTime =
> > > 1373831299130, correlationId = null, replyTo = null, persistent =
> false,
> > > type = null, priority = 4, groupID = null, groupSequence = 0,
> > > targetConsumerId = null, compressed = false, userID = null, content =
> > > org.apache.activemq.util.ByteSequence@7f94dadb, marshalledProperties =
> > > null, dataStructure = null, redeliveryCounter = 0, size = 0,
> properties =
> > > null, readOnlyProperties = false, readOnlyBody = false, droppable =
> > false}
> > > ActiveMQBytesMessage{ bytesOut = null, dataOut = null, dataIn = null }
> |
> > > org.apache.activemq.broker.region.RegionBroker | ActiveMQ Transport:
> > > tcp:///<ip-address>:40887@6122
> > >
> > > Does that mean it failed to deliver the messages before the time to
> live
> > ?
> > >
> > > On 12 July 2013 14:49, Praveen Bysani <praveen.ii...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi,
> > > > Thanks i added the log4j for all components under
> org.apache.activemq.
> > > > Hopefully i can see something useful.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On 12 July 2013 00:21, Christian Posta <christian.po...@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> Add logging configuration to turn on logging for the bridge.
> > > >>
> > > >> e.g.,
> > > >>
> > > >> to your log4j.properties, add
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > >
> >
> log4j.logger.org.apache.activemq.network.DemandForwardingBridgeSupport=DEBUG
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >> On Thu, Jul 11, 2013 at 3:38 AM, Praveen Bysani <
> > > praveen.ii...@gmail.com
> > > >> >wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >> > Hi,
> > > >> >
> > > >> > I found the following lines in the subscriber log
> > > >> >
> > > >> > | org.apache.activemq.transport.InactivityMonitor | DEBUG |
> > 2013-07-11
> > > >> > 07:34:44,384 | 30000 ms elapsed since last read check.
> > > >> > | org.apache.activemq.transport.InactivityMonitor | DEBUG |
> > 2013-07-11
> > > >> > 07:34:44,384 |
> > > >> > org.apache.activemq.transport.InactivityMonitor$2@61726a5c9999
> > > >> > ms elapsed since last write check.
> > > >> >
> > > >> > I have disabled the inactivity period in the broker connection url
> > by
> > > >> > setting maxInactivityDuration to 0. Does it have anything to do
> with
> > > >> > messages not being received ?
> > > >> >
> > > >> > On 11 July 2013 12:18, Praveen Bysani <praveen.ii...@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > > >> >
> > > >> > > Hi Christian,
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > Thanks for your input. But i have little idea of what those
> terms
> > > >> mean.
> > > >> > > Could you elaborate please.
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > On 10 July 2013 21:06, Christian Posta <
> christian.po...@gmail.com
> > >
> > > >> > wrote:
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > >> Your best bet would be to set logging to debug on the network
> > > bridge
> > > >> > >> (DemandForwardingBridgeSupport) and possibly the RegionBroker
> to
> > > see
> > > >> > what
> > > >> > >> is happening.
> > > >> > >>
> > > >> > >> On Wednesday, July 10, 2013, Praveen Bysani wrote:
> > > >> > >>
> > > >> > >> > Hi,
> > > >> > >> > I have the following setup in my project,
> > > >> > >> >
> > > >> > >> > 1. multiple producers (p1,p2,p3) in Hongkong region
> sending
> > > >> > variable
> > > >> > >> > size non-persistent messages to a topic t1 on the broker
> > (b1)
> > > in
> > > >> > >> > Phillippines region
> > > >> > >> > 2. p1,p2 and p3 send messages frequently (~1 second)
> > > >> > >> > 3. each message has a time to live of 30 seconds
> > > >> > >> > 4. a tcp network bridge from b1 to a new broker b2 in HK
> > > region
> > > >> > >> > 5. consumers c1 in hongkong and c2 in europe subscribed to
> > b2
> > > >> > through
> > > >> > >> > ssl and a consumer c3 subscribed to t1 on b1 through tcp
> > > >> > >> >
> > > >> > >> > I don't see the same amount of messages received across c1,
> c2
> > > and
> > > >> c3.
> > > >> > >> The
> > > >> > >> > number of messages received is in the following order c3 >
> c1 >
> > > >> c2. I
> > > >> > >> use
> > > >> > >> > the default settings for prefetch values and *vmCursor *for
> > > >> > >> > *pendingSubscriberPolicy
> > > >> > >> > *and *strictOrderDisptachpolicy*.
> > > >> > >> >
> > > >> > >> > While i understand there could be delays in passing the
> message
> > > to
> > > >> > these
> > > >> > >> > consumers as c3 could be slow consumer and c1 is fast,
> > shouldn't
> > > >> the
> > > >> > >> > message eventually be received to all consumers of a topic.
> Why
> > > do
> > > >> i
> > > >> > see
> > > >> > >> > different volumes of
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > *Christian Posta*
> > http://www.christianposta.com/blog
> > twitter: @christianposta
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Regards,
> Praveen Bysani
> http://www.praveenbysani.com
>
--
*Christian Posta*
http://www.christianposta.com/blog
twitter: @christianposta
