Does restarting the broker without enabling link stealing also let you work
around the problem? Based on what you've described as working vs. not, I
would expect that to be a viable workaround. And if it's not, that might
give more information about what's actually going on.
Tim
On Sep 27, 2017 1
Hi,
This problem is non-reproducible. I have tried many times with different
configuration but not able to reproduce it. Even our clients using ActiveMQ
sometimes face this suddenly in prod environment where dev/qa works fine.
The worst part about this issues is to fix it. This does not get resol
Since you're looking for clustered operation, ActiveMQ Artemis sounds like
a better fit for your needs than ActiveMQ 5.x would be.
Tim
On Sep 27, 2017 3:49 PM, "Nick Stolwijk" wrote:
> Hi,
>
> We are just starting with Docker Swarm and we have 2 services that need to
> talk to each other asynch
Hi,
We are just starting with Docker Swarm and we have 2 services that need to
talk to each other asynchronously. The messages need to be confirmed that
they have been processed. So that when a container goes down, another will
pick it up.
With these requirements I thought to use an MQ and with m
Hi Eric,
Thank you for your valuable input. Let me test with other GC algo and get
back to you with results. I deeply appreciate your efforts.
- Abhinav Suryawanshi
--
Sent from: http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/ActiveMQ-User-f2341805.html
Hi
We have setup two brokers in network of brokers config in version 5.15.0
Its a simple config that has:
2017-09-27 13:08:52,029 | INFO | Waited 2.000 seconds for ExecutorService:
java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor@1d225cd9[Shutting down,
Thanks Justin,
This is much appreciated. I'll have to rest if for a while now, other
priorities. I'll pick this up later again.
Thomas
--
Sent from: http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/ActiveMQ-User-f2341805.html
