2008/11/4 selezovikj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> System.out.println("before declaration");
> final Log log = LogFactory.getLog("MSGSTATS");
> System.out.println("after declaration");
>
> "after declaration" is never printed out.
>
>
> So commons-logging initializes a Log, which initializes log4j by read
System.out.println("before declaration");
final Log log = LogFactory.getLog("MSGSTATS");
System.out.println("after declaration");
"after declaration" is never printed out.
So commons-logging initializes a Log, which initializes log4j by reading the
log4j.properties file, then in the log4j.prop
I tried it and I just don't get the information that is logged locally:
[ main] FailoverTransport DEBUG Waking
up reconnect task
[ ActiveMQ Task] FailoverTransport DEBUG
Attempting connect to: tcp://localhost:61617
This gets log
If so, does this mean that by default, with the failover transport
commons-logging logs to where it tries to connect ?
James.Strachan wrote:
>
> 2008/11/4 selezovikj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>>
>> So failover tries to log that it is connected, but it cannot log since it
>> is
>> not connected.
>>
2008/11/4 selezovikj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> So failover tries to log that it is connected, but it cannot log since it is
> not connected.
> But, my question is: connected where ?
> Why doesn't failover log locally that it is connected ? Why can't it log
> without being connected ? It can just log
So failover tries to log that it is connected, but it cannot log since it is
not connected.
But, my question is: connected where ?
Why doesn't failover log locally that it is connected ? Why can't it log
without being connected ? It can just log locally.
Is this something that will be fixed in
Can you try adding
log4j.logger.org.apache.activemq=OFF
and see what happens?
Cheers
--
Dejan Bosanac
http://www.ttmsolutions.com - get a free ActiveMQ user guide
ActiveMQ in Action - http://www.manning.com/snyder/
Scripting in Java - http://www.scriptinginjava.net
selezovikj wrote:
> I
2008/11/4 selezovikj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> I am not sending ActiveMQ logging information to the JMS appender.
>
> __
> Logger messageLogger = Logger.getLogger("MSGSTATS");
> messageLogger.info("Client logs to 61617");
> __
>
> The M
I am not sending ActiveMQ logging information to the JMS appender.
__
Logger messageLogger = Logger.getLogger("MSGSTATS");
messageLogger.info("Client logs to 61617");
__
The MSGSTATS (in the log4j.properties) uses the MessageLog an
You should not be sending ActiveMQ logging information to the JMS
appender right? Otherwise its catch 22; you can't connect until you've
logged and can't log until you've connected.
2008/11/4 selezovikj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> Yes, I am using the JMS appender and in the jndi.properties file I sp
Yes, I am using the JMS appender and in the jndi.properties file I specify
"failover:(tcp://localhost:61617)" as the value for the providerURL.
I have a simple client logging messages using the JMS appender.
Commons-logging is logging to a jms appender when I am NOT using the
failover transport.
2008/11/4 selezovikj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> I am using log4j to send logging events to a topic on an ActiveMQ broker.
> I use the failover transport to specify a secondary host and automatic
> reconnection.
> When the commons-logging.jar is in the classpath the failover transport is
> blocking.
I am using log4j to send logging events to a topic on an ActiveMQ broker.
I use the failover transport to specify a secondary host and automatic
reconnection.
When the commons-logging.jar is in the classpath the failover transport is
blocking.
Has anyone experienced this ?
Does commons-logging
Hi,
Please could somebody explain exactly what is going wrong to hit this cyclic
redundancy problem?
The log4j JMSAppender is a very useful thing to have. We have created a
little jms logging server where we want clients (using the jmsAppender) to
be able to log to. We want to use the Failover t
ok thank you very much for the explanation :)
Gary Tully ha scritto:
> Both A and B are listening on advisories from each other. When A gets
> a subscription, it fires an advisory which B picks up. B responds by
> creating a corresponding subscription on B which results in an
> advisory. The advis
Both A and B are listening on advisories from each other. When A gets
a subscription, it fires an advisory which B picks up. B responds by
creating a corresponding subscription on B which results in an
advisory. The advisory on B is picked up by the listener on A but the
TTL of 1 kicks in and the a
add an id attribute to the amq:broker bean and get a handle on the
bean using your spring context, then call shutdown on it.
for logging, see:
http://activemq.apache.org/how-can-i-enable-detailed-logging.html
2008/11/4 hanson2010 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> Spring context configuration is as below..
no one?
Yari Marchetti ha scritto:
> Hi,
> i have a network of brokers composed by 2 broker connected to each
> other; all clients (producer and consumers )are attached to broker 'A'.
> Network TTL is set to 1.
>
> In broker 'A' log file i find some:
>
> A Ignoring Subscription ConsumerInfo {comma
18 matches
Mail list logo
