I'm experiencing the same issue, both on ActiveMQ 4.1.1 and 5.2.0.
Two questions:
1) It seems like broker is accepting the ACK and erroneously replying with
the ERROR message. Is that correct?
2) Is this a bug and an intentional design to disallow STOMP clients from
handle messages concurrently?
Sorry, for question #2, I mean Is this a bug or an intentional design?
On Fri, Jan 23, 2009 at 1:18 AM, Roger Hoover roger.hoo...@gmail.comwrote:
I'm experiencing the same issue, both on ActiveMQ 4.1.1 and 5.2.0.
Two questions:
1) It seems like broker is accepting the ACK and erroneously
Hi Frank,
do you think you can produce a test case for the behavior you describe.
Thanks,
Gary.
2009/1/22 frank_at_zynga fr...@zynga.com:
Hi,
We're just starting to phase in the use of AMQ 5.2.0 in a high volume
environment and I've run into some strange behavior with transacted
sessions.
Hello,
I changed my AMQPersistenceAdapter to write 1 GB files (total store size is
30GB)
bean id=store
class=org.apache.activemq.store.amq.AMQPersistenceAdapter
property name=directory value=${activemq.base}/data/
!-- 1GB = 1073741824 --
Your information helped me.
Thank you.
Sailaja.
bsnyder wrote:
On Fri, Jan 16, 2009 at 6:29 AM, sailaja p spind...@progress.com wrote:
Hi,
I am begginer to the Active MQ and trying understand the features of
Active
MQ. I have downloaded the Active MQ 5.1.0. When I tried to start the
Well, the main question is now:
1. Why is the queue getting slower when there are a lot of messages inside?
So with X million messages, enqueue times are 4-7 seconds?
This is probabally because the hashIndex is limited, I think you need
to make the indexMaxBinSize quite large and use the same
Ok i set the broker name..and commented out the network connect line.
However I still get unknown host exception .. the host name in the error
is the domain name of the server but AMQ must be getting that information
over the other public interface ..which i have not used in the config .
Is
bsnyder wrote:
Trying to do custom message processing inside of ActiveMQ is by no
means easy to achieve. Camel is definitely the better solution for
this type of work.
We are seeking a solution to this as well. I will be looking at Camel down
the road , but right now I have two
Hi,
this selector is fine (just tested it). I guess the problem is in the
virtual topics. Are you sure you are consuming for the right place? Do you
receive a message if you don't have selector?
Cheers
--
Dejan Bosanac
Open Source Integration - http://fusesource.com/
ActiveMQ in Action -
It shouldn't behave that way. Can you create a test case to simulate this
behavior?
Cheers
--
Dejan Bosanac
Open Source Integration - http://fusesource.com/
ActiveMQ in Action - http://www.manning.com/snyder/
Blog - http://www.nighttale.net
On Fri, Jan 23, 2009 at 10:18 AM, Roger Hoover
I also tried adding
?useLocalHost=true to the Transport connector
as follows
transportConnector name=openwire
uri=tcp://192.168.98.101:61616?useLocalHost=true /
which also fails, AMQ still gets the machine domain name from the public
interface and then tries to resolve that name on the
- Yes, I am consuming from the physical queue of the virtual topic to which I
am publishing.
- I receive all the messages from the same physical queue if I don't use any
selectors.
Please find attached the test class (TestXPathSelectors.java) for reference.
Jagath
Dejan Bosanac wrote:
Hi,
I have scrapped the uri addition .
I tried changing the broker name property and the useLocalHostBrokerName to
false.
However the problem is unchanged AMQ still gets the machine DNS name from
the public interface and then complains that it is unable to resolve the
public DNS name on the
Hi Dejan,
Thanks for the reply. Do you need it in a particular language? I could
easily create a test case in Perl for it.
Roger
On Fri, Jan 23, 2009 at 8:31 AM, Dejan Bosanac de...@nighttale.net wrote:
It shouldn't behave that way. Can you create a test case to simulate this
behavior?
Hi Gary,
I was able to create a test case and reproduce this behavior on a consistent
basis. The source code is attached and is actually nearly identical to the
code we're using in production. While running through some test scenarios I
was able to discover some additional information:
- The
Hmmm, one of the files didn't get uploaded. Let me try again...
http://www.nabble.com/file/p21632866/TestCase.java TestCase.java
frank_at_zynga wrote:
Hi Gary,
I was able to create a test case and reproduce this behavior on a
consistent basis. The source code is attached and is
16 matches
Mail list logo