i was hoping this was the case and that the killed process was saying a last
goodbye on the way out.
this is a nice behavior. i've just recently run similar tests using hornetq
where killing the java process (or having it crash) did not result in the
server becoming aware so quickly. i certainl
When you kill the client JVM the broker would get "connection reset by
peer" as the JVM closes the underlying socket. I think you'll even
see this if you run wireshark and look at the packets between the
client and broker.
However if you're running the client on a different machine than the
broke
The confusion i have with such a fast client failure detection being possible
is that it would appear to be at odds with the various default timeout
settings such as maxInactivityDuration.
I was hoping someone could point me to either a forum post or a doc page or
even just a keyword to search fo
The basic I understood is...the frequency of a handshake / ping message to
know the server is dead might be very very very less, that it appears like
instantaneous.
If I am expecting message "I am ALIVE"from a person "Jack Daniels" 10,000
times/Sec..., when ever I have no reply... Jack Daniels w
i would like to get a better understanding of how the server determines that
a client is alive. i have been reading about the following parameters as
much as possible:
maxInactivityDuration, connectionTimeout, soTimeout and failover
settings.
believe it or not, what's puzzling me isn't somet
Hey,
Thank you thank you,.. you solved my problem !
It does make my architecture puzzle a lot bigger, but that is the fun in
programming, isn't it? :-)
(yes it is a lot bigger than the example I posted)
Thanks!
Van: Timothy Bish [via ActiveMQ]
[ml-no
Thx for your reply.
Yes.. I delete a bit to much.. just to be sure there wasn't anything open
anymore.
When I delete all the deletes the behaviour remaines the same!
grtz..
Van: Nag [via ActiveMQ] [ml-node+3046860-2107221496-202...@n4.nabble.com]
Ve
On Wed, 2010-11-17 at 03:56 -0800, jandeclercq wrote:
> Hey,
>
> When I disconnected and closed down a producer. And afterwards I'm trying to
> reconnect, the cpp-library crashes. I don't know what I'm doing wrong.
>
> See the code below (choose option R)
>
>
The problem most likely results f
Using delete on a pointer to an object not allocated with new gives
unpredictable results
Please check where you are mis-managing 'amq_producer'
--
View this message in context:
http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/activemq-cpp-library-3-2-2-reconnect-fails-tp3046566p3046865.html
Sent from th
Using delete on a pointer to an object not allocated with new gives
unpredictable results
Please check where you are mis-managing 'amq_producer'
Thank You
Nag P
-Original Message-
From: jandeclercq [mailto:jan.decle...@alsic.be]
Sent: Wednesday, November 17, 2010 6:56 AM
To: use
If Camel API didn't change, then not. But you should test that.
Cheers
--
Dejan Bosanac
-
FuseSource - The experts in open source integration and messaging.
Email: dej...@fusesource.com
Web: http://fusesource.com
Twitter: http://twitter.com/dejanb
ActiveMQ in Action - http://www.m
Do I need to changed the "activemq-camel-5.4.1.jar"?
--
View this message in context:
http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/What-must-I-do-to-use-Camel-2-5-with-ActiveMQ-5-4-tp3045516p3046720.html
Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Hey,
When I disconnected and closed down a producer. And afterwards I'm trying to
reconnect, the cpp-library crashes. I don't know what I'm doing wrong.
See the code below (choose option R)
#include
#include
#include
#include
#include
#include
#include
#include
#include
#include
#
Hi,
replacing the jars should be enough.
Cheers
--
Dejan Bosanac
-
FuseSource - The experts in open source integration and messaging.
Email: dej...@fusesource.com
Web: http://fusesource.com
Twitter: http://twitter.com/dejanb
ActiveMQ in Action - http://www.manning.com/snyder/
Blo
14 matches
Mail list logo
