I'm not 100% on this, so someone correct me if I'm wrong.
* concurrentConsumers should only be set on the "from" part of a route.
using a queue in the "to" part of a route is not actually going to consume
any messages.
* You probably should not use concurrentConsumers at all with a topic. A
topi
Does anybody know if when working with a Spring JmsTransactionManager
and the ActiveMQComponent, is it safe/possible to raise the
cacheLevelName above something other than CACHE_NONE? When working
with the ActiveMQ's failover protocol, having to re-establish a new
connection after each message is
Yes, I have read and understand that JavaDoc entry. It says it MAY be
possible to raise the cache level when not explicitly doing XA
transactions on JBoss 4. I'm asking what is the safe level to raise
it to when doing Locally managed (non-XA) transactions when working
with the ActiveMQComponent.
Ashwin,
Thanks for this, it helped a lot. I ended up going with
CACHE_CONNECTION. When I had it set at CACHE_SESSION it looked like I
dropped a message (1 out of 500k) during an ActiveMQ fail over test.
Not sure if it was from my CACHE_SESSION setting or something else,
but i'm getting very good
I haven't worked with batches, but I did just spend a bunch of time
working with setting up Local JMS Transactions with ActiveMQ and
Camel. The big things I found were:
* Make sure you turn the prefetch policy down to zero if you are
consuming messages across different machines. You can do this
i think the problem is that you have:
System.out.println(exchange.getProperty("
"+Exchange.EXCEPTION_CAUGHT,Throwable.class));
and what you actually want is:
System.out.println(" " +
exchange.getProperty(Exchange.EXCEPTION_CAUGHT,Throwable.class));
Travis
On Thu, Sep 1,
