Are you testing ActiveMQ Artemis? If so which version are you having issue
with?Sent from my Galaxy
Original message From: NawazAli Shaik
Date: 01/07/2021 18:39 (GMT+00:00) To:
users@activemq.apache.org Subject: need details of parallel processing
Hi team,
We are
Inter broker communication clustering, federation and bridges all work only
using the brokers native core protocol.Sent from my Samsung Galaxy smartphone.
Original message From: BBruhn
Date: 01/06/2020 19:21 (GMT+00:00) To: users@activemq.apache.org Subject:
Alternative to
Just to be clearActiveMQ 5.x (classic) supports JMS 1.1 which does not support
shared subscriptions as this is a JMS 2.0 feature. There is virtual topics and
queues which is close in feature but it is not JMS 2.0 spec shared
subscriptions.ActiveMQ Artemis supports JMS 2.0 which part of the JMS
Federation works only over core protocol currently.Sent from my Samsung Galaxy
smartphone.
Original message From: sateesh kumar kapu
Date: 28/02/2020 23:32 (GMT+00:00) To:
users@activemq.apache.org Subject: Artemis federation over HTTP I am trying out
federation example
Non destructive is so a consumer doesnt ack the message. Essentially meaning
the last value is always kept in the lvq.When a new messages replaces and old
then it needs the old one is acked to it is removed, this is the point.Sent
from my Samsung Galaxy smartphone.
Original message
So interestingly we have similar needs for having messages flow dynamically
between separately managed brokers (not a cluster but distinct seperate).As
such i have been working on a solution akin to federated queues and exchanges
thats exists in rabbitmq. I am actually nearing getting this
So Artemis is fully production ready, it has install base in production
environments the org i work for being example.Also it is used in eclipse paho,
and jboss wildfly so has install bases where those are used as well.Two vendors
i know of are also supplying enterprise support.Redhat with AMQ7
You could use a countdown latch that then when you wish to shutdown you simply
from another thread countdown.Sent from my Samsung Galaxy smartphone.
Original message From: Riyafa Abdul Hameed
Date: 21/02/2019 14:06 (GMT+00:00) To: users@activemq.apache.org Subject: JMS
So i think first is to run the example, so you see it working. Then if thats
all good, we can simply assume something in config is wrong in your own setup
broker.
Sent from my Samsung Galaxy smartphone.
Original message From: PedroRP
Date: 17/01/2019 09:57 (GMT+00:00) To:
Hi
The fact youre not getting failover suggests either client side or broker side
is not configured correctly.
Could i suggest you look through the HA examples found here.
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/tree/master/examples/features/ha
CheersMike
Sent from my Samsung Galaxy
A slight correction on Tims respone.
Artemis is able to page to disks, messages that cannot be kept in memory. It
does by default try keep messages in memory for performance but it is not
limited by this.
Sent from my Samsung Galaxy smartphone.
Original message From: Tim Bain
I cant remember if FQQN is supported on openwire. If it is.
You could you use a JMSqueue with a FQQN to bind to the topic subscription you
want to share
Sent from my Samsung Galaxy smartphone.
Original message From: Timothy Bish
Date: 03/12/2018 15:53 (GMT+00:00) To:
Hi
So perf doesnt increase by having more slaves.
Having a cluster setup with multiple masters (note every master would need a
slave) or if you use amqp protocol using federated clusters with qpid dispatch
router would deal help with this.
If you need to protect from single server / single az
; > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > I've already opened a JIRA for this [1]. Will send a PR shortly.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Justin
> > > > >
> > > > > [1] https://issues.ap
Quite a bit of the queue config is updateable. Whilst this config currently is
not i see no reason why it couldnt be if you wanted to contribute the support
for it to be.
Obviously the caveat would be any message already routed would not be affected,
only new ones.
Sent from my Samsung
Add to that list (as i said there's always more)
https://cloud.spring.io/spring-cloud-sleuth/
Sent from my Samsung Galaxy smartphone.
Original message From: "michael.andre.pearce"
Date: 20/08/2018 17:35 (GMT+00:00) To:
users@activemq.apache.org Subject:
so people can add
and maintain the support, without needing changes in the core broker.
Sent from my Samsung Galaxy smartphone.
Original message From: "michael.andre.pearce"
Date: 20/08/2018 16:37 (GMT+00:00) To:
users@activemq.apache.org Subject: Re: AW: AW
Whilst appreciate that open tracing project intent is that it becomes the
standard, afaik there is just two main project adopting it zipkin and jaeger.
Currently none of the big APM vendors some i mentioned in previous are backing
it. As such they could form create their standard and then come
So for AMQP it would be to wrap around those clients, just the same as the JMS
one does.
Re openwire clients are jms so you just wrap that the same.
Re
serve side tracing, id be wary here as will add perf hit. But if integration
thats what the plugins api is for if you really want to add that.
-contrib/java-jms)
Sent from my Samsung Galaxy smartphone.
Original message From: "michael.andre.pearce"
Date: 20/08/2018 13:36 (GMT+00:00) To:
users@activemq.apache.org Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] OpenTracing in Artemis
We use similar tech in my org for transaction
We use similar tech in my org for transactional tracing and stiching, we use a
proprietary off the shelf software, its one of the big APMs
If you build the tracing to wrap around the clients api's eg, in JMS the JMS
Message, and put the magical uuid thats used to stich in that.
This would also
Clebert im able to recreate this and also worked out in code why this happens.
Ill try catch you on irc tomorrow or friday.
Sent from my Samsung Galaxy smartphone.
Original message From: Clebert Suconic
Date: 25/07/2018 20:20 (GMT+00:00) To:
users@activemq.apache.org
In the org i work for we use replication succesfully in production and on
critical flows.
Like Justin says you should test it for your use case.
Sent from my Samsung Galaxy smartphone.
Original message From: Justin Bertram
Date: 05/07/2018 15:34 (GMT+00:00) To:
It does not. This is the classic ActiveMQ 5.x range that just had release.
ActiveMq Artemis has its own versioning currently 2.6.0 just released this week
also.
You can find artemis latest and historic versions here:
https://activemq.apache.org/artemis/download.html
Sent from my Samsung Galaxy
This seems genuine bug for the upgrade from 2.1 to 2.2 suprised no one else has
seen it though including ourselves (we upgraded a long while back and don't
remember such issue), can you raise a Jira for this.
Sent from my Samsung Galaxy smartphone.
Original message From: Dan
This is expected behaviour, scheduled delivery is about delaying the delivery
of the message into the queues.
Use case here is like delayed price quotes on exchange (in fact this is how we
use it where I work), idea is all messages are sent to the broker with say a 5
minute schedule for
Have you tried making the session client acknowledge and simply not
acknowledging the message?
It is the acknowledge that removes it, so by not acknowledging the message
would remain for when you restart your consumer.
Currently there is no retroactive support which would be the golden grail
27 matches
Mail list logo
