James, You've tested two of the three cases; would it be possible to test the third one?
- ActiveMQ timeout < ZooKeeper timeout: fails - ActiveMQ timeout = ZooKeeper timeout: succeeds - ActiveMQ timeout > ZooKeeper timeout: ??? If we can zero in on exactly what the recommendation is, I can update http://activemq.apache.org/replicated-leveldb-store.html (or another page if you think there's a more appropriate one) to include the recommendation we come to. But I don't want to say on the official documentation that it has to be = if >= would work fine. Tim On Fri, Jul 24, 2015 at 10:39 AM, James A. Robinson <j...@highwire.org> wrote: > So about 40 hours after fixing the settings so that both activemq and > zookeeper agreed on what the session timeout is, I haven't seen any new > instances of the errors I was seeing before. Previously it'd typically be > no more than 4 hours between complaints about needing to re-establish > zookeeper connections. > > If I'm right, then this indicates the instability I saw can be masked over > by making sure the two agree on the session timeout, but that the > fundamental fragility of the activemq zookeeper client code is still a > potential risk. > > Jim > > On Wed, Jul 22, 2015 at 6:27 PM James A. Robinson <j...@highwire.org> > wrote: > > > Hrm... I'm wondering if this is due to the zookeeper server having a > > default session timeout of 40 seconds vs. a lower one I set for the > > activemq node... > > >
