What's the question here? Why temp usage exceeds TempLimit? Why StoreUsage for the three brokers seems unrelated to disk usage? Why three brokers in a LevelDB cluster have vastly different StorePercentUsage values? Something else?
Do you have Producer Flow Control ( http://activemq.apache.org/producer-flow-control.html) enabled? Tim On Mon, Oct 5, 2015 at 6:47 AM, zystem <z...@mail.ru> wrote: > I have standard 3 node ActiveMQ cluster. > I monitor it via JMX. And this is what I see: > Master: > StoreLimit=8589934592 > StorePercentUsage=2 > TempLimit=5368709120 > TempPercentUsage=3 > Slave1: > StoreLimit=8589934592 > StorePercentUsage=93 > TempLimit=5368709120 > TempPercentUsage=146 > Slave2: > StoreLimit=8589934592 > StorePercentUsage=7 > TempLimit=5368709120 > TempPercentUsage=0 > > Actual filesystem state is: > Master: > du -hs /var/activemq/data/ > 266M /var/activemq/data > Slave1: > du -hs /var/activemq/data/ > 124M /var/activemq/data > Slave2: > du -hs /var/activemq/data/ > 119M /var/activemq/data > > So question is what means > StorePercentUsage=93 > TempPercentUsage=146 > then used Replicated LevelDB Store > > Or in another words why Replicated LevelDB Store ignores this settings > StoreLimit=8589934592 > TempLimit=5368709120 > > > > -- > View this message in context: > http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/ActiveMQ-and-Replicated-LevelDB-Store-tp4702593.html > Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. >
