On the surface it sounds like your project could make good use of ActiveMQ.
Using ActiveMQ is a bit like choosing what your enterprise integration layer
will look like. The advantage of ActiveMQ is that it uses industry proven
messaging (in JMS) and has the convenience of providing many different
Hey everyone,
It's official ... ActiveMQ-CPP v3.1.1 has now been released. This release has
several bug fixes for issues found since the 3.1.0 release. Several memory
leaks
were found and fixed so its definitely a good idea to update, and since this was
a patch release there are no API changes
Sounds scary to me, as system I'm working on uses activemq extensively, and
is not production-proven yet.
Do you have/can you build a junit test case that reproduces the issue under
5.3? If so, that looks like a good start for Jira defect.
Disclaimer - I'm not an AMQ committer.
Thanks,
Pavel
Do you still get problems if not using Spring ?
On 20 Feb 2010, at 07:12, Elliot Barlas wrote:
Was this issue ever resolved? I am seeing this as well with a large
number
of concurrent consumers. Same symptoms. Lost messages until broker
restart.
Thanks,
Elliot
chrajanirao wrote:
Hi,
We have run into cases in which some clients hang and we have restart the
AMQ broker.
I took a look at the 2 users of (2) (identified by their IP) and their
connection had a FIN_WAIT state on the netstat command, these 2 clients are
hanging
It seems there was a brief network outage and
On Sat, Feb 20, 2010 at 12:03 PM, ActiveUser cutebear...@hotmail.com wrote:
Hi,
We have run into cases in which some clients hang and we have restart the
AMQ broker.
I took a look at the 2 users of (2) (identified by their IP) and their
connection had a FIN_WAIT state on the netstat
Yes. I am using spring 3.0, but not for JMS. I manage my own connections,
sessions, producers, and consumers. I have tried reproducing the issue in a
test case, but I cannot. It only occurs in my application, when I have
roughly 20 or more concurrent consumers, each associated with a
Currently we are not but have considered that. Our messaging layer will also
try reconnect.
One of my concern is that the client does not detect disconnection properly.
So I want to see if there is anything else to fix before we use fail-over.
After all, one can only run one or two fail-over
I did need it, so I fixed it.
See:
https://issues.apache.org/activemq/browse/AMQ-2455
--
View this message in context:
http://old.nabble.com/Bridging-not-working-reliable-tp27661175p27670889.html
Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Failover protocol does detect disconnect properly, even when it is single
host. I've seen that many times, and the only problematic case so far was
with prefetch=0, which is unlikely what you experience.
So for example,
tcp://localhost:61616 will not reconnect
failover:(tcp://localhost:61616)
thanks for the patch!
On 20 Feb 2010, at 22:02, jschmied wrote:
I did need it, so I fixed it.
See:
https://issues.apache.org/activemq/browse/AMQ-2455
--
View this message in context:
http://old.nabble.com/Bridging-not-working-reliable-tp27661175p27670889.html
Sent from the ActiveMQ - User
11 matches
Mail list logo