Thanks for the update Tim. I have a scheduled update to 5.11.1. Supposed to go to production this week.
Once there, as you've advised, we'll be in a better place to diagnose the problem. Thanks. On 9/23/15, 6:13 AM, "tbai...@gmail.com on behalf of Tim Bain" <tbai...@gmail.com on behalf of tb...@alumni.duke.edu> wrote: >That's definitely possible, if either selectors are in use or the messages >were all sent before any consumer subscribed. EnqueueCount and >DequeueCount aren't very useful for topics; instead, you need to check the >EnqueueCount and DequeueCount on each individual subscription on the topic, >and for that I always use JMX. That will eliminate the "messages sent >before the consumer subscribed" factor (because by definition, the >subscription only gets those messages sent after it was created), and using >JMX lets you look at other attributes such as how many messages have been >dispatched, whether a selector is in use, etc. > >Many, many people run networks of brokers without the advisory messages >running them out of memory, so it's unlikely that that's your problem. So >if you see any subscription with messages that have been dispatched but are >not acknowledged, that's a cause for concern; otherwise, this "theory" >isn't your problem and you should focus your attention elsewhere. > >With that being said, if you're still on the pre-5.3.0 broker you were on a >month ago, all bets are off (and JMX might or might not expose the >attributes I mentioned). If you did the upgrade (I sure hope you did, or >that you have one scheduled in the very near future), what version are we >talking about? > >Tim > >On Tue, Sep 22, 2015 at 9:37 AM, Daniel Israel <disr...@liveops.com> wrote: > >> >> We are running a network of brokers, but I'm tracking down a memory issue >> and one of the "theories" is that messages sent to Advisory topics is not >> being freed because we see [sometimes very large] numbers of messages >> enqueued, no messages dequeued, and a non-zero number of consumers. Is >> that something that's possible? >> >> >> >> >> On 9/21/15, 8:46 PM, "tbai...@gmail.com on behalf of Tim Bain" < >> tbai...@gmail.com on behalf of tb...@alumni.duke.edu> wrote: >> >> >This is the first search result when I Google for 'activemq advisory': >> >http://activemq.apache.org/advisory-message.html >> > >> >If you're not trying to explicitly use advisory topics yourself, you can >> >ignore them; brokers in a network of brokers use them to figure out where >> >consumers are, but you don't have to do anything with them. If you're not >> >running a network of brokers, you'll get a small performance boost by >> >turning them off, as described on the page I linked. Note that it's a >> >small benefit and that you'll have to remember to undo the change if you >> >ever move to a network of brokers topology; consider whether it's worth >> the >> >effort for your use case. >> > >> >On Mon, Sep 21, 2015 at 4:44 PM, Daniel Israel <disr...@liveops.com> >> wrote: >> > >> >> I see a large number of advisory topics (ActiveMQ.Advisory.*) in my list >> >> of topics, such as: >> >> >> >> ActiveMQ.Advisory.TempQueue >> >> >> >> >> >> What are these used for? Is it a problem if these Topics have consumers >> >> and none of the messages are dequeued? >> >> >> >> Thanks for any help. >> >> >>
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
