Re: Do activemq-cpp connection questions.

Hi Tim, I used gdb along with the code and I figured out the problem. It was indeed my fault, an ID10T error on my part. I constructed an invalid broker URI string. My string was as follows: std::string brokerURI = "failover:(tcp://127.0.0.1:61616" "?initialReconnectDelay=10

Re:Re: Why the transaction down the performance so much???

According to my comprehension of the JMS Spec, without transaction and AUTO_ACKNOWLEDGE in session the disk sync should occur once a meesage is get by the consumer; it's just like the case each message has a transaction committing? In this case the performance of the two cases should be similar,

Throttling deadlock

I'm encountering a deadlock related to throttling (producer flow control). Here is the scenario which causes this. I receive a message from a queue, process this message, and send a message to a different queue inside the message handler. When throttling kicks in, this results in a deadlock. The ne

Re: Do activemq-cpp connection questions.

In this case you best source of info is the code. Stepping into the FailovetTransport start method and the reconnect method may show what is going wrong. On Nov 30, 2011 12:40 PM, "JRR" wrote: > Hello Tim, > > I tried the test using version */3.4.0/* of ActiveMQ-CPP and the problem > remains the

Re: Do activemq-cpp connection questions.

Hello Tim, I tried the test using version */3.4.0/* of ActiveMQ-CPP and the problem remains the same. The connection factory creates a connection even if there is no broker running, and I've set the parameters to not try forever. Then when start is invoked on the connection it blocks until the bro

Re: Why the transaction down the performance so much???

For producers, only use transactions is you are sending more than one message, so for batching. Jms already guarantees a disk sync when a send returns. For clients do what you wish. Do try and cache connections/sessions/prodcuers and if you have a single consumer cache that. Remeber, transaction

Re: Buffering producer messages

the typical activemq way to do that is use an embeded vm broker and a network connector to forward messages to the target when it can. Disable persistence and it will use a memory store so it will be have like a buffer. On 29 November 2011 16:27, Joe Carter wrote: > Hi, > > Does anyone know how t

Re: Do activemq-cpp connection questions.

On Tue, 2011-11-29 at 16:20 -0800, JRR wrote: > Hello Tim, > > I am playing with the simple producer and the fail over options. However, I > am not getting the results I expected and I'm hoping you can share some > insights. > > I am using version 3.2.3 of the activemq-cpp library on a SuSE Linux

Re: Should Total Message Count decrease?

Hi, as you are using queues, you don't have durable/non-durable subscriptions. But it appears to me that you do NOT close the last consumer, that's why the queue is not actually removed. You also should NEVER need to interact with the persistence adapter. Still, the issue is that you should NOT N

Re: Should Total Message Count decrease?

Hi, I'm using ActiveMQQueues, that are not persisted. The subscriptions are non-durable. I'm removing the queues from the JMX bean by calling removeQueue (which succeeds, as they dis-appear when viewed with JConsole) - However, when I look with a profiler, I still see ActiveMQQueue instances layin

Re: Should Total Message Count decrease?

Hi, first thing: does it occur while there is a consumer? Or only if there is no consumer? Are you using queues or topics (maybe even with persistent subscriptions)? TTL basically works the way you expected, BUT it depends if the messages are persistent or not, and if you have configured expired