security plugin to deal with temporary queue and topics better
--
Key: AMQ-795
URL: https://issues.apache.org/activemq/browse/AMQ-795
Project: ActiveMQ
Type: Improvement
Reporter: james strachan
Fi
[ https://issues.apache.org/activemq/browse/AMQ-794?page=all ]
james strachan resolved AMQ-794:
Resolution: Fixed
Done - you can now disable advisory support via
...
or
BrokerService broker = new BrokerService();
broker.setAdvisorySupport(false)
[
https://issues.apache.org/activemq/browse/AMQ-787?page=comments#action_36523 ]
Hiram Chirino commented on AMQ-787:
---
Fix also applied to 4.0 branch rev 419025.
> The UdpTransport could potentialy fail to bind on linux.. caused the
> UdpTransportTest to
[ https://issues.apache.org/activemq/browse/AMQ-787?page=all ]
Hiram Chirino updated AMQ-787:
--
Fix Version: 4.0.2
> The UdpTransport could potentialy fail to bind on linux.. caused the
> UdpTransportTest to fail sometimes.
> ---
[ https://issues.apache.org/activemq/browse/AMQ-793?page=all ]
Hiram Chirino resolved AMQ-793:
---
Resolution: Fixed
new stomp client which fixes this has been backported to 4.0 also.
> problem with auto-ack and messages being redelivered in Stomp clien
Hiram,
BTW, did you run the activemq-cpp cpp-unit tests against the broker with the
new stomp transport? I took a look at your code and it looks like you still
have the request-id/response-id headers in there, so it should work fine.
Looks a lot simpler - easier to find your way around.
Nate
On
It all looks good to me. Given we've already hit AMQ-793 recently...
http://issues.apache.org/activemq/browse/AMQ-793
due to the flow control issues in the stomp implementation under load,
I'd say lets get rid of the old version and go with the new.
On 7/2/06, Hiram Chirino <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
problem with auto-ack and messages being redelivered in Stomp clients
-
Key: AMQ-793
URL: https://issues.apache.org/activemq/browse/AMQ-793
Project: ActiveMQ
Type: Bug
Versions: 4.0.1
Re
+1
Thanks for the patch!
Nate
On 7/4/06, Hiram Chirino <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
It should be on it's way to your gmail account.
On 7/4/06, Nathan Mittler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Hey Hiram,
> Looks ok at first glance - could you send me the patch file as an
> attachment? I seem to b
+1
On 7/4/06, Hiram Chirino <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
These are all good questions.. And that's why I kinda was think a branch
would be good since it would alow folks to go crazy figuring out the best
solution and not have to work about breaking things while the changes are in
progress.
On 7/4
These are all good questions.. And that's why I kinda was think a branch
would be good since it would alow folks to go crazy figuring out the best
solution and not have to work about breaking things while the changes are in
progress.
On 7/4/06, James Strachan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 7/4/0
On 7/4/06, Hiram Chirino <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
The problem is there is a high likelyhood that we will need to also extend
the MessageStore interface to provide some cursoring ablilities. So the
change is not going to just be sefcontained in the broker region package.
Ah I see - in that ca
It should be on it's way to your gmail account.
On 7/4/06, Nathan Mittler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hey Hiram,
Looks ok at first glance - could you send me the patch file as an
attachment? I seem to be having problems applying the patch through copy
&
paste into subclipse.
Thanks,
Nate
On 7
The problem is there is a high likelyhood that we will need to also extend
the MessageStore interface to provide some cursoring ablilities. So the
change is not going to just be sefcontained in the broker region package.
On 7/4/06, James Strachan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Are you totally conv
14 matches
Mail list logo
