Dear artnaseef, thanks for the reply.
The line of codes that sends is very simple:invoke simpleSend message in
Action.java:
for(int i=0;i<1000;i++){
producer.simpleSend(pojo);
}
then goes to Producer.java ：
public void simpleSend(HashMapPojo pojo){
this.jmsTemplet.setDeliveryPersistent(
Thank you for your reply, so what this means:
"Since there could be a massive number of individual message groups we use
hash buckets rather than the actual JMSXGroupID string"
so I mean if we can use hash then we dont really need to have one consumer
per each id! so there is no need to have large
Hi,
We are using activemq to handle our JMS messages, the messages come from
different devices with unique device_id and we like to make sure that
messages from a specific device , process in order.
also we have thousands of devices.
I am new on AMQ but we have performance issue and I came across
It depends on when the durable subscription went offline - but its difficult to
know what the real problem is - without a test case :)
On 23 Apr 2014, at 20:00, artnaseef wrote:
> Should non-persistent messages even be stored in an offline durable
> subscription?
>
>
>
> --
> View this mess
There is nothing obviously wrong in the posted snippets. Is it possible to
use a debugging and put a break-point on the line of code that sends
(interestingly, that line of code is missing from the snippets given)?
Note that I believe this has no effect as the broker calls it internally:
Thanks for the reference - I've made the edits; they should be reflected on
the website soon.
--
View this message in context:
http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/hawtio-dashboard-not-appearing-in-activemq5-9-1-tp4680393p4680485.html
Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailing list archive at Nabbl
Should non-persistent messages even be stored in an offline durable
subscription?
--
View this message in context:
http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/Non-persistent-Messages-Not-getting-expired-even-after-expiration-time-exceeded-tp4680428p4680484.html
Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailing l
Looking at the MBean issue - it seems the Queue was deleted even though there
are consumers. There is normally protection to prevent that.
Note that the Consumer is a totally different MBean. The naming of the
MBeans, which changed - I believe in 5.8.0 - to make them more hierarchical
makes this
Connection pooling is a solution to the problem of overhead in creating and
discarding connections when using a technology that doesn't support
long-lived connections.
If the technology used is straight JMS, there should be no need to use
pooling.
What client technology is it?
--
View this me
Ah, mixing 4.x and 5.x might be bad - I've never looked into that.
Perhaps bridging between the old brokers and new would work well.
http://activemq.apache.org/jms-to-jms-bridge.html
The big problem is needing the two activemq client versions, which means it
may be necessary to have two JVMs run
Message groups force processing of a single destination to only one consumer
at a time - not really the processing model you've described.
If there were separate queues for each device, message groups would work.
However, if there are large numbers of devices, that could be a real concern
since i
Did anyone get a chance to look into this?
Thanks,
-mmg
--
View this message in context:
http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/Can-a-produce-and-consumer-running-on-different-activemq-versions-exchange-messages-tp4680200p4680477.html
Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailing list archive at Nabble
the broker maintains some per connection state, connectionId and
clientId to enforce the single clientId in use jms requirement, this
can be an area of thread contention on heavily loaded systems that
open/close many connections.
So even for vm connections (where there is no tcp socket) there will
Hey,
Did anybody get a chance to look at this issue.
Thanks,
Anuj
--
View this message in context:
http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/PageFile-is-not-loaded-when-recreating-queue-tp4679066p4680470.html
Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
non-persistent messages, if off lined to tmp storage, won’t be expired until
they are scheduled for dispatch. If you could, raise an enhancement issue [1],
giving as much detail as possible?
[1] - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AMQ
On 23 Apr 2014, at 11:53, khandelwalanuj wrote:
> It's
It's Non persistent message.
Non persistent message is sent from the producer but since it is send to the
topic which has inactive durable subscriber, this message will be stored in
non-persistent message store "activemq-data/broker/tmpstorage/".
Thanks,
Anuj
--
View this message in context
Dear all,
MQ version 5.5.0. I want to use non-persistent delivery in queue,so i make
these settings:
1.comment out persistenceAdapter in activemq.xml
2.set jmstemplate:
* *
3.in producer:
Hi, so you should remove the reference to hawtio in the doc :
http://activemq.apache.org/activemq-591-release.html
--
View this message in context:
http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/hawtio-dashboard-not-appearing-in-activemq5-9-1-tp4680393p4680456.html
Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailing
Is the message non-persistent or are you sending a persistent message to a
broker with a non-persistent (in memory) message store?
On 23 Apr 2014, at 07:55, khandelwalanuj wrote:
> Did anyone get a chance to look at this.
>
>
>
> --
> View this message in context:
> http://activemq.22833
Hi all,
I take it from reading the below links that no one has managed to create
functionality which connects WCF.net 4.0 to ActiveMQ using the AMQP 1.0
protocol. It sounds like this would be difficult to achieve could someone
please confirm this is the case?
http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.co
20 matches
Mail list logo
