Re: ActiveMQ-CPP Producer Flow Control Question

On Fri, 2012-07-06 at 15:56 -0700, JRR wrote: > Hello, > > I'm having problems with Producer Flow Control. I have a C++ producer that > interacts with a Java application and we are using AMQ to communicate > between > the two. The AMQ Broker is managed by our Java team, and I've been working > wi

ActiveMQ-CPP Producer Flow Control Question

Hello, I'm having problems with Producer Flow Control. I have a C++ producer that interacts with a Java application and we are using AMQ to communicate between the two. The AMQ Broker is managed by our Java team, and I've been working with the C++ producer client. The java team recently changed t

[ANNOUNCE] Apache.NMS.Stomp v1.5.1 Released

The Apache.NMS.Stomp 1.5.1 Release bundle is now available at the following location: This release is based on the Apache.NMS API v1.5.0 and runs on .NET frameworks 2.0+, .NETCF 2.0+ and Mono 2.0+. Changes in this version include * Fixe

Re: Problem with TransactDatabaseLocker's lock statement

Thanks for pointing to this issue. But the method that overrides lock create statement has a bug... If isUseLockCreateWhereClause() is true, the produced statement will look something like this: *SELECT * FROM ACTIVEMQ_LOCK WHERE ID=1 WITH (UPDLOCK, ROWLOCK)* which will throw a */com.microsoft.sq

Using activemq as a client within a localized Netbeans module

Hi all, just wanted to share my experience trying to setup a retroactive consumer into a localized Netbeans Platform application. I discovered a weird bug trying to create a topic when the platform was running in a language different then english (french in my case) ... session.createTopic("aTop

Re: Problem with TransactDatabaseLocker's lock statement

have a peek at https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AMQ-1191 On 6 July 2012 16:36, mikmela wrote: > Have you seen this simple select *SELECT * FROM ACTIVEMQ_LOCK WHERE ID=1* > working for MS SQL Server? > It doesn't for me in terms of master/slave synchronization (i.e. slave is > not blocked on

Re: Problem with TransactDatabaseLocker's lock statement

Have you seen this simple select *SELECT * FROM ACTIVEMQ_LOCK WHERE ID=1* working for MS SQL Server? It doesn't for me in terms of master/slave synchronization (i.e. slave is not blocked on this select) unless I do something like this *SELECT * FROM ACTIVEMQ_LOCK(rowlock, updlock, REPEATABLEREAD)

Re: Messages stuck in pending

I finally managed to get to the bottom of this one. The problem seems to have been that the sending machine's clock (which is also where the broker is) was 13 minutes behind the receiving machine's clock and messages were being sent with a TTL of 10 minutes. This seemingly caused them to just sit