Do you have a sample project or anything that we can use to reproduce what you're seeing? At this point, the only way I can see how you might be getting null there is if you were using a newer client with an older broker, but it's certainly possible I'm not seeing all the possibilities. Regardless, it looks like you're hitting a bug and I need a way to reproduce it in order to fix it. Even a clear, concise description of the steps necessary to reproduce the issue (i.e. no code) would go a long way here.
Justin On Sat, Jul 26, 2025 at 11:33 PM Philip <philip.pi...@protonmail.com.invalid> wrote: > I should have been more clear about my exact setup. > > I am trying to create multiple consumers that either listen to a JMS queue > or a JMS topic. > Each consumer listening to a queue has no client ID as it is not needed. > Each consumer listening to a topic has both a client ID (the same one for > all consumers) > and a subscription name (unique per consumer) configured. > > The queues and topics are all hosted within an external application server > that I am connecting to. > All of this works perfectly until I try to change the subscription name of > one of the topic consumers. > > I believe this issue stems from the fact that they are durable > subscribers, which leads my > application server to store them persistently. > After changing the subscription name, the ActiveMQSession is aware of the > fact that it has changed > and I run into the second part of this if-statement because no > short-circuiting occurs. > > https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/blob/98d792d135dacb8fc567bc514f42a40d91c0657b/artemis-jms-client/src/main/java/org/apache/activemq/artemis/jms/client/ActiveMQSession.java#L1002 > > I am trying to understand why the choice was made to have this > `configurationManaged` property be > nullable as it leads to an issue where the null value is attempted to be > inverted which leads to an exception. > > I am using ActiveMQ Artemis 2.40.0 > > Philip > > > > On Saturday, July 26th, 2025 at 20:18, Justin Bertram <jbert...@apache.org> > wrote: > > > The simplest way to investigate is with code that reproduces the problem. > > Do you have a sample project or anything that we can use to reproduce > what > > you're seeing? > > > > Also, what version of ActiveMQ Artemis are you using on the broker and > the > > client? > > > > Lastly, can you clarify your use-case? It seems you're trying to create > > multiple different durable subscriptions using the same client ID and > > subscription name on the same topic. Is that correct? > > > > > > Justin > > > > On Fri, Jul 25, 2025 at 12:59 PM Philip philip.pi...@protonmail.com > .invalid > > > > wrote: > > > > > Hello ActiveMQ users, > > > > > > I am writing this with square eyes and a tired mind. > > > > > > I am trying to do an (assumedly) simple thing within my Spring Boot > > > application, but I keep failing. > > > > > > I want to be able to define JmsListener endpoints that may either be > > > listening to queues or topics. > > > In order to achieve that I want to provide different configurations > that > > > e.g. make it so that the underlying connection is durable. > > > > > > All seems to go well until - in the deepest depths of ActiveMQ - a > > > consumer is attempted to be constructed. > > > A request is sent to (presumably) check if the Topic can be reached > using > > > the provided configuration (url, username, password). > > > The initial response seems fine, until this dreaded line is reached > and my > > > world starts to crumble. > > > > > > > https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/blob/98d792d135dacb8fc567bc514f42a40d91c0657b/artemis-jms-client/src/main/java/org/apache/activemq/artemis/jms/client/ActiveMQSession.java#L1002 > > > > > > Because as it turns out, this `result.isConfigurationManaged()` > statement > > > returns `null` and an Exception is thrown when trying to invert it. > > > > > > I am trying to understand what I need to do for this value to be set > (or > > > if this value is not supposed to be set and this is indeed a bug). > > > > > > On another (connected) note, this check seems to only happen because > the > > > `selectorChanged` flag is true. > > > I don't quite understand what it has changed from (or at least how the > > > `oldFilterString` is even able to be set to a value in the first place > when > > > the consumer that is constructed is the first an only one). > > > > > > I am assuming this is in some way connected to this javadoc comment, > but I > > > cannot figure out how to combat this issue. > > > > > > > https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/blob/98d792d135dacb8fc567bc514f42a40d91c0657b/artemis-jms-client/src/main/java/org/apache/activemq/artemis/jms/client/ActiveMQSession.java#L983-L988 > > > > > > I hope I was able to somewhat explain my disarrayed thoughts. > > > > > > Best Regards,Philip > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@activemq.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@activemq.apache.org > For further information, visit: https://activemq.apache.org/contact > > >
