Yep, I'm basing it only on the fact that 3.2 is a new implementation that hasn't been as widely tested as the 3.0 series. I'm coming at this from the viewpoint of my application which doesn't currently have throughput problems. If speed was more critical, my thoughts might be different.
Aaron On Sunday 02 February 2003 09:29 pm, you wrote: > Can you clarify this recommendation? > > It sounds like you said "3.2 is better, but use 3.0.x". Is this solely > because 3.2 isn't quite baked yet or is there another reason to stick > with 3.0.x? > > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of > Aaron Lindsey > Sent: Sunday, February 02, 2003 3:13 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: [JBoss-dev] JMS reliability (?) > > Hi Calin, > While there is still room for improvement in the performance > category, I > believe the corruption problems with large queues is fixed in the later > releases of the 3.0.x series. If you use JBoss 3.0.5 or later, you > shouldn't > experience the problems outlined in points 1 and 2 below. JBoss 3.2.x > has a > new implementation that should help in high load situations, but I would > > suggest using the 3.0.x series for production use. > > Aaron > > On Sunday 02 February 2003 11:17 am, you wrote: > > Hi, > > > > I saw a couple of worrying messages in the mailing lists regarding the > > reliability of JBoss implementation of JMS. > > > > Is JBoss' JMS reliable and suitable for production environment? For > > example for the scenario of an external client (or an another JBoss > > server) > > > sending messages to a JBoss server. > > > > If the answer is yes ( I hope this is the answer) , which JBoss > > version is > > > the most reliable and suitable for production? > > > > Any feedbacks really appreciated, > > Calin Lupa > > > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: Muntean Horia > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Sent: Sunday, January 19, 2003 1:30 PM > > Subject: Re: [JBoss-user] jms issues > > > > Rob Finneran wrote: > > >Hi Listees, > > > > > >Just to give feedback, and not to rant too much: > > > > > >I have also seen the problems stated in 1 and 2 of these messages. > > I had > > > > to remove message queueing from my production environments because > > of > > > > it. IMHO, It would be very big plus if the JMS reliability issues > > were > > > > resolved. > > > > > >I hate to complain because JBoss has served me well, but I would > > like to > > > > use JMS more frequently in my production environments. > > > > > >Cheers, > > > > > >Rob > > > > > > > > >----- Original Message ----- > > >From: "Ed Brown" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > >To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > >Sent: Friday, January 17, 2003 12:37 PM > > >Subject: Re: [JBoss-user] jms issues > > > > > >>Quoting Peter Fagerlund <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > >>>torsdagen den 16 januari 2003 kl 03.49 skrev Ed Brown: > > >>>>Here are the list of problems that I ran into when I used the > > JBoss > > > >>>>implementation: > > >>>> > > >>>>1. If too many messages were queued up, and the server was > > stopped > > > >>>> and > > >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>>restarted, the server hung. > > >>>> > > >>>>2. Sometimes when the server was stopped and restarted, the > > message > > > >>>>queues seemed to get corrupted and the things wouldn't work. I > > would > > > >>>>have to stop JBoss, manually remove the queues and restart. > > >>>> > > >>>>3. The message queues didn't seem to hold up under heavy load. > > >>> > > >>>DefaultDS is used per default unless You massage Your persistent > > >>>settings the above can result as perceived. > > >> > > >>The default settings were used when this happend. > > >> > > >>>1) I suspect a corrupted DB from a not clean shutdown > > >>>2) I suspect a corrupted DB from a not clean shutdown > > >> > > >>Shutdown was done using "CTRL-C" at the console. Since that was > > the way > > > >> to > > > > > >shut it down, corrupted queues resulting from shutdown was not > > > acceptable. > > > > > >>>3) Depends how heavy We talk here ? could also be my introduced > > thread > > > >>>bug ? > > >> > > >>It was single threaded. > > >> > > >>>What was Your test setup HW/SW and JBoss version ? > > >> > > >>JBoss 3.0.1, on Windows 2000 and Linux. > > >> > > >>I'm not alone in finding the JBoss implementation of JMS lacking. > > I've > > > >read the forums. IMO, it's not ready for prime time, for that > > matter, > > > >neither is the JBoss inclusion of Axis. > > > > > >>But I've written enough. > > >> > > >>Ed Brown > >> > >>______________________________________________________________________ > > _ > > > >>__ This mail sent via toadmail.com, web e-mail @ ToadNet - want to > > go > > > >> fast? http://www.toadmail.com > > >> > > >> > > >>------------------------------------------------------- > > >>This SF.NET email is sponsored by: Thawte.com - A 128-bit > > supercerts > > > >> will allow you to extend the highest allowed 128 bit encryption > > to all > > > >> your clients even if they use browsers that are limited to 40 bit > > >> encryption. Get a guide > > >> here:http://ads.sourceforge.net/cgi-bin/redirect.pl?thaw0030en > > >> _______________________________________________ > > >>JBoss-user mailing list > > >>[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > >>https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-user > > > > > >------------------------------------------------------- > > >This SF.NET email is sponsored by: Thawte.com - A 128-bit > > supercerts > > > > will allow you to extend the highest allowed 128 bit encryption to > > all > > > > your clients even if they use browsers that are limited to 40 bit > > > encryption. Get a guide > > > here:http://ads.sourceforge.net/cgi-bin/redirect.pl?thaw0030en > > > _______________________________________________ > > >JBoss-user mailing list > > >[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > >https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-user > > > > Until now, we use JBossMQ only with JVM protocol (i.e. facades > > sending > > > messages that are consumed by MDB's on the same server) with File > > PM. > > > We had no problems so far. But with external clients .... we > > switched to > > > MQSeries to do the work 'cause JBossMQ can't handle simple tasks > > like > > > delivering reliable a message. Maybe the latest versions of JBossMQ > > do a > > > better job. > > > > Regards, > > Horia > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > > This SF.NET email is sponsored by: FREE SSL Guide from Thawte > > are you planning your Web Server Security? Click here to get a FREE > > Thawte SSL guide and find the answers to all your SSL security > > issues. > > > http://ads.sourceforge.net/cgi-bin/redirect.pl?thaw0026en > > _______________________________________________ > > JBoss-user mailing list > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-user > > ------------------------------------------------------- > This SF.NET email is sponsored by: > SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld = Something 2 See! > http://www.vasoftware.com > _______________________________________________ > Jboss-development mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development > > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > This SF.NET email is sponsored by: > SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld = Something 2 See! > http://www.vasoftware.com > _______________________________________________ > Jboss-development mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.NET email is sponsored by: SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld = Something 2 See! http://www.vasoftware.com _______________________________________________ Jboss-development mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development
