Hi all,
we have set up a cluster of machines using ActiveMQ with Master/Slave
failover protocol. All messages use a TTL of 120 seconds and if TTL is
reached are sent to an individual DLQ.
Basically this works fine. However, there is one scenario where the
automatic routing of a message to the
Hi,
I changed the implementation from receiveNoWait() to receive(1) but it did
not change anything in the behavior.
After the client crashes I can still see the delivered message in the Queue
(using browse) but no receive() call can get this message again, it seems to be
stuck in the queu
Hi,
here is a JUnit test (see below) I wrote to simulate the crash of a
worker and the expected redelivery behavior:
You have to replace _connectionProvider.getConnection(queueName); with
some code of you own to get you a Connection to the Queue.
The CrashingWorker does not commit or rollback the
Well,
if I understand you correctly then after the default timeout of 3ms is
reached the connection should disappear and the message should be redelivered
to another client. As said before, some messages were redelivered others simply
"disappeared".
Are the messages that are redelivered vis
3ms.
Joe
ActiveMQ Ref Guide - http://bit.ly/AMQRefGuide
daniel.stucky-2 wrote:
>
> Hi ActiveMQ Team,
>
>
>
> in the eclipse open source project SMILA we use ActiveMQ (version 5.3.2)
> to implement a producer/consumer pattern with JMS. The basic setup is as
> foll
Hi ActiveMQ Team,
in the eclipse open source project SMILA we use ActiveMQ (version 5.3.2)
to implement a producer/consumer pattern with JMS. The basic setup is as
follows:
- the software runs in a cluster of machines (usually between 4
and 16)
- we use the Pure Master/Slave
