Problem subscribing to a topic after machine wakes from sleeping

Hi there, I have a broker on machine A that publishes a topic for machine B to subscribe to. Machine A shuts down each night at 12am and powers up at 5am. Machine B sleeps at 12am and wakes up at 5am (as distinct from powering down/up; just in case this is relevant). What I'm finding is that whe

[ANNOUNCE] ActiveMQ-CPP Version 3.2.0 Released

Hi Everyone, Its official, AcitveMQ-CPP v3.2.0 has now been released. This is a major update to the C++ library adding support for SSL using the popular OpenSSL library, along with a complete implementation of the QueueBrowser class and support for Message Body compression. There has also been a

Re: what about Slave failing in "Pure-Master Slave" setup?

just discovered another issue with "pure Master-Slave" in 4 out of 5 test it all worked "by the book" - i.e. when I kill MASTER, SLAVE accepgts connections and becomes a master... but tried it out one more tiem and got this [r...@ip-10-195-225-236 bin]# ERROR MasterConnector-

Re: what about Slave failing in "Pure-Master Slave" setup?

Thanks Garry RE: >should just ignore the slave if any replication attempt fails. exactly! the current way it works is that it provides "continuity" only when MASTER fails in the pair, but not when SLAVE fails (from what you describe it is the case when SYNC(ACKed) send is used, but this is mo

Re: what about Slave failing in "Pure-Master Slave" setup?

This is true, pure master slave is asymmetrical and it requires manual intervention to restore the paring once the master fails. There is an option on the broker to have the master shutdown if the slave fails, but this is off by default. The problem is that there is currently no way to have a slave

Re: Does a timeout exist for Consumers?

but to directly answer your question, yes! I am interested. On 18 June 2010 10:41, Luis Matos wrote: > > Hi Gary, > > I did manage to put the strategy to work, but it's giving a lot of > exceptions. I tried with different values on the parameters, but the result > is similar always. > > My test

what about Slave failing in "Pure-Master Slave" setup?

One of the benefits of Pure Master Slave are that supposedly it provides some "HA" - namely books, tutorials, wiki site describe that "when MASTER fails SLAVE" becomes a MASTER and clients are smoothly reconnected to it via the virtue of "failover transport"... That is all nice and good, and TR

Re: AMQ persistent adapter

A network is store and forward, so any messages on A will stay on A while it is down. Only messages that were already forwarded to B will be visible on B. If you want failover of the data, then you need to use a shared store (file system or jdbc) master slave setup. On 18 June 2010 10:55, radha_mi

Re: Does a timeout exist for Consumers?

If you can break down or simplify your usage into a junit test case that would be great. Open a jira issue[1] and attach your test case and results. In other words, If I can easily reproduce the exceptions that you see then I can help. [1] http://activemq.apache.org/support.html On 18 June 2010 1

AMQ persistent adapter

Hi, I have two brokers connected to a network failover:(tcp://a:61616,tcp://b:61616) the persistent store in both is AMQPersistentAdapter and we are using ActiveMQ 5.3.0 and we send persistent messages Now, we send messages to broker A (tcp://a:61616) and after sometime it crashes. What will

Re: Does a timeout exist for Consumers?

Hi Gary, I did manage to put the strategy to work, but it's giving a lot of exceptions. I tried with different values on the parameters, but the result is similar always. My test is done with 2 karafs connected to a broker. I send 1 messages from a producer and wait to see if they arrive on

Re: Securing ActiveMQ 5.3.2 Web console

this article explain, how can you secure web console : http://www.nighttale.net/activemq/securing-activemq-531-console.html i have tried, and it work fine. titexe magellings wrote: > > http://old.nabble.com/Securing-the-web-console-impossible--tt16765525.html#a16784476 > > > vbose wrote:

Re: Favicon Made Quickly

Added with https://issues.apache.org/activemq/browse/AMQ-2784 Thanks -- Dejan Bosanac - http://twitter.com/dejanb Open Source Integration - http://fusesource.com/ ActiveMQ in Action - http://www.manning.com/snyder/ Blog - http://www.nighttale.ne