Re: What does “Messages Dequeued” mean on ActiveMQ web console page?

[Tom Hall]

This is the first result when I googled your question.
http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/Message-Dequeue-count-in-jconsole-0-even-after-messages-are-recieved-and-consumed-by-subscribers-td4675875.html
 

It seems to answer your question.


> On Jul 12, 2018, at 7:20 AM, libing195205  wrote:
> 
> It's sad that nobody interests in it, could anyone help?
> 
> 
> 
> --
> Sent from: http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/ActiveMQ-User-f2341805.html

Re: How to Disable ActiveMQ.Advisory.TempQueue in Apache-Artemis 2.3.0

[Jiri Daněk]

On Thu, Jul 12, 2018 at 4:22 PM kullboys  wrote:

> I see the message count and No of messages keep on increasing up to 100K.
>
> Why do i see it?
>

This sounds to me like the description of
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ARTEMIS-1419 OpenWire advisory
message never deleted, fixed in 2.4.0.
-- 
Mit freundlichen Grüßen / Kind regards
Jiri Daněk

Re: How to Disable ActiveMQ.Advisory.TempQueue in Apache-Artemis 2.3.0

[Clebert Suconic]

What protocol are you using?

it sounds you are using openwire. I would upgrade to 2.6.2. As there
was a few openwire fixes.


if you use other clients (protocols) than openwire you won't have t he
Advisory used.

On Thu, Jul 12, 2018 at 3:43 AM, kullboys  wrote:
> Hello everyone
> Could someone help me in how to Disable the *ActiveMQ.Advisory.TempQueue* in
> broker.xml  configurations.
>
> I see the message count and No of messages keep on increasing up to 100K.
>
> Why do i see it?
> If i disable it, does it have any impact?
>
> I'm using Activemq - Artemis 2.3.0 version.
> Java 8, jdk1.8.0_144 version is used.
>
> Your response will be appreciated.
>
> Thanks . 
>
>
>
> --
> Sent from: http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/ActiveMQ-User-f2341805.html



-- 
Clebert Suconic

How to Disable ActiveMQ.Advisory.TempQueue in Apache-Artemis 2.3.0

[kullboys]

Hello everyone
Could someone help me in how to Disable the *ActiveMQ.Advisory.TempQueue* in 
broker.xml  configurations. 

I see the message count and No of messages keep on increasing up to 100K. 

Why do i see it? 
If i disable it, does it have any impact? 

I'm using Activemq - Artemis 2.3.0 version. 
Java 8, jdk1.8.0_144 version is used. 

Your response will be appreciated. 

Thanks .    



--
Sent from: http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/ActiveMQ-User-f2341805.html

Re: What does “Messages Dequeued” mean on ActiveMQ web console page?

[libing195205]

 It's sad that nobody interests in it, could anyone help?



--
Sent from: http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/ActiveMQ-User-f2341805.html

Re: C++ Broker Performance with large messages

[Timothy Bish]

On 07/12/2018 03:25 AM, kullboys wrote:

Hello everyone
I tested throughput of the Qpid C++ Broker (compiled as Release).

It was tested on a virtual machine with 15 GB RAM.

First I sent a 100 MB message into a persistent queue. From sender to
receiver it took 16 seconds for one message.

Afterwards I sent a 300 MB message, this one took 125 seconds. So this is
not 3 times more (as I would have expected but 7,5 times more).

Any suggestions how to improve throughput?

Do you have an idea why 300 MB is 7,5 times slower than 100 MB?
Thanks . 




--
Sent from: http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/ActiveMQ-User-f2341805.html

This is the ActiveMQ mailing list, you need to ask folks on the Qpid 
users mailing list in order to find an expert to help you out.


http://qpid.apache.org/discussion.html

--
Tim Bish
twitter: @tabish121
blog: http://timbish.blogspot.com/

C++ Broker Performance with large messages

[kullboys]

Hello everyone
I tested throughput of the Qpid C++ Broker (compiled as Release). 

It was tested on a virtual machine with 15 GB RAM. 

First I sent a 100 MB message into a persistent queue. From sender to 
receiver it took 16 seconds for one message. 

Afterwards I sent a 300 MB message, this one took 125 seconds. So this is 
not 3 times more (as I would have expected but 7,5 times more). 

Any suggestions how to improve throughput? 

Do you have an idea why 300 MB is 7,5 times slower than 100 MB? 
Thanks .    




--
Sent from: http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/ActiveMQ-User-f2341805.html

RE: [ARTEMIS] Three nodes symmetric static discovery cluster with HA replication colocated and automatic client failover

[Stefaniuk, Marcin]

Background verification means in separate threads (producer and consumer). What 
I want to point here is that ServerUtil.killServer() (heavily used in examples) 
is not actually stopping a broker on Windows machine.

My claim is based on experiment when I've killed all 3 nodes from cluster and 
both producer and consumer connected to one of a cluster nodes are still 
working but 3 - 3 should be 0 but on Windows it is at least one ;-). I've run 
the same code on Linux and both producer and consumer are throwing an error (as 
expected).

Regarding to my reproducer I'm almost there. I have currently internal use 
version and then I should extract something free from company's traits.

Kind regards
Marcin


-Original Message-
From: Justin Bertram [mailto:jbert...@apache.org] 
Sent: 11 July 2018 18:20
To: users@activemq.apache.org
Subject: Re: [ARTEMIS] Three nodes symmetric static discovery cluster with HA 
replication colocated and automatic client failover

What do you mean by "background verification"?

Also, what exactly fails immediately when you use 'artemis.cmd stop'?

One of the main goals of having a reproducible test-case is to be able to
share that test-case with others so they can reproduce what you are
seeing.  Reproducibility is one of the foundations of scientific
investigation.  Practically speaking, it cuts through a lot of unnecessary
back and forth since describing the issue with words alone is extremely
time consuming and error prone.  Do you have any kind of reproducer that
you could share?


Justin

On Wed, Jul 11, 2018 at 11:01 AM, Stefaniuk, Marcin <
marcin.stefan...@credit-suisse.com> wrote:

> I have tried to recreate my case with use of provided tooling (ServerUtil)
> for orchestrated server start and stop but I received worrying results on
> Windows machine.
>
> I'm starting three nodes of the cluster and background threads for produce
> / consume (for one minute). After 10 seconds first node is killed, next 10
> second node is killed, next 10 seconds third node is killed and...
> background verification is still working! It fails immediately when I use
> artemis.cmd stop from command line.
>
> It works on Linux.
>
> Kind regards
> Marcin
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Justin Bertram [mailto:jbert...@apache.org]
> Sent: 05 July 2018 16:07
> To: users@activemq.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [ARTEMIS] Three nodes symmetric static discovery cluster with
> HA replication colocated and automatic client failover
>
> I haven't had any time to look into this in depth.  Would you be able to
> work up a reproducer?  I think you could easily modify one of the HA
> examples shipped with the broker to reproduce your use-case.  You might
> even try simplifying it a bit to just 2 nodes.  Simpler is always better
> for reproducers as it narrows down the investigation.  Once you get a
> reproducer you can slap it into a GitHub repo somehwere.
>
>
> Justin
>
> On Wed, Jul 4, 2018 at 9:19 AM, Stefaniuk, Marcin <
> marcin.stefan...@credit-suisse.com> wrote:
>
> > I'm struggling to create set-up as mentioned in the subject on ActiveMQ
> > Artemis 2.5.0. My key configuration looks as follows (for first node of
> > three):
> >
> > 
> > tcp://0.0.0.0:61616?
> > tcpSendBufferSize=1048576;tcpReceiveBufferSize=1048576;
> > protocols=CORE,AMQP,STOMP,HORNETQ,MQTT,OPENWIRE;
> useEpoll=true;amqpCredits=
> > 1000;amqpLowCredits=300
> > 
> >
> > 
> > tcp://localhost:61616
> > tcp://localhost:62616
> > tcp://localhost:63616
> > 
> >
> > 
> > 
> > node-1-connector
> > 500
> > true
> > ON_DEMAND
> > 1
> > 
> > node-2-connector
> > node-3-connector
> > 
> > 
> > 
> >
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 7
> > true
> > 2
> > -1
> > 2000 > retry-interval>
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> >
> > Rest of nodes has similar configuration - adjusted cluster connections
> and
> > acceptors. I'm deploying it also on three separate hosts (each different
> > from localhost). What is important I have no discovery groups (no
> > possibility to use UDP).
> >
> > So my test is connecting to a cluster using ActiveMQConnectionFactory and
> > URI "(tcp://node-1:61616,tcp://node-2:62616)?ha=true&
> reconnectAttempts=-1"
> > (leaving third to be obtained directly from a cluster) and one thread is
> > producing and second consuming messages (separate connection used). Test
> is
> > working fine (unsurprisingly) even when producer is connected to
> different
> > nodes of the cluster. But when one node is stopped then producer /
> consumer
> > connected to that node is affected - no send / receive is performed but
> > some messages on the client side is buffered and flushed when node is
> again
> > available. I would expect to automagically switch connection to another
> > node but it is not happening here. I have tried that previously without