71b9]
From: Justin Bertram
Sent: Friday, September 8, 2023 15:16
To: users@activemq.apache.org
Subject: Re: Very high address space container memory usage
[You don't often get email from jbert...@apache.org. Learn why this is
important at https://aka.ms/Le
> ...each "address size" byte takes 40- 160 "container" bytes.
Can you elaborate on how this was calculated?
Also, what exactly do you mean by "'container' bytes"? Are you talking
about JVM heap? Keep in mind that as far as the broker is concerned
We have a Artemis 2.30.0 2 node cluster setup running in amazoncorretto:17
container image (Java 17 JRE), with persistance disabled.
We've had issues with high memory usage for our Artemis broker for a long time,
but recently several events raised a possible candidate to the cause. There
Hi
We are currently running apache-artemis-2.19.1 in load balancing clustered
mode
We have a health check that reports high usage of memory on addresses. This
program uses the MBean methods available on the broker instance to query
for these stats.
The routing type for below is multicast.
[2023
bert.helmstr...@systema.com
Sent: Tuesday, December 13, 2022 12:03 AM
To: users@activemq.apache.org
Subject: Antwort: [Ext] broker memory usage for temporary queues
*** [Caution] This email is from an external source. Please use caution
responding, opening attachments or clicking embedded links. ***
Hi Jo
ll waste memory.
Regards
Herbert
Von:"John Lilley"
An: "users@activemq.apache.org"
Datum: 12.12.2022 17:56
Betreff: [Ext] broker memory usage for temporary queues
Greetings!
We are seeing that our broker is getting OOM errors with 2GB JVM size. We
use a
Greetings!
We are seeing that our broker is getting OOM errors with 2GB JVM size. We use
a lot of temporary queues for JMS reply-to with the RPC pattern. In order to
better understand what drives memory use, is there a rule of thumb for the
memory we would expect to be used by each temporary
Hello !
I have some questions about ActiveMQ memory usage...
First, let me explain what happened.
I have some queues (10+) which need to process thousands of messages every
day.
The option *"flow producer control" is enabled* for every queue.
All my messages are *persistent *mess
Thank you Eric,
That was the issue indded. Changing GC algorithm helped dramatically reduce
memory consumption.
Abhinav SUryawanshi
--
Sent from: http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/ActiveMQ-User-f2341805.html
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
Java 7 is end of life, so when I filed the bug I didn't include it in
affected versions. I'm almost 100% certain that it is affected as well. The
bug is in G1.
-Erik
--
Sent from: http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/ActiveMQ-User-f2341805.html
Thank you for suggestion but I checked the Bug tracker it says it affetcts
Java 8,9 . We are still using Java 7.
Thanks & Regards
Abhinav Suryawanshi
--
Sent from: http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/ActiveMQ-User-f2341805.html
This could be
http://bugs.java.com/bugdatabase/view_bug.do?bug_id=JDK-8180048, a memory
leak in G1. If so you can work around it by switching to concurrent mark
sweep or you can upgrade to the very latest Java SE 8u144 from Oracle, where
the bug should be fixed. Not sure if the fix is in OpenJDK ye
Hi All,
I have below configuration for my java actvemq process where Xmx is 15360M
but when I see the process usage of memory using glance I see RSS 41.8gb
and VSS 51.6gb . pmap |grep total gives me total 54059348K. I
am not sure what is happening in activemq that is causing this much amount
o
Thank you
--
View this message in context:
http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/A-question-about-memory-usage-jvm-tp4728197p4728209.html
Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
s wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> I'm a little new about activemq.
>
> We allocated 6gb jvm memory for activemq and in the activemq.xml file we
set
> memory usage for jvm %70 percent.In this case it's supposed to use ( 6gb =
> 6144 mb ) 61,44 * 70 = 4.3 gb if i'm cor
w about activemq.
>
> We allocated 6gb jvm memory for activemq and in the activemq.xml file we set
> memory usage for jvm %70 percent.In this case it's supposed to use ( 6gb =
> 6144 mb ) 61,44 * 70 = 4.3 gb if i'm correct ?
> <http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/file/n
Hello,
I'm a little new about activemq.
We allocated 6gb jvm memory for activemq and in the activemq.xml file we set
memory usage for jvm %70 percent.In this case it's supposed to use ( 6gb =
6144 mb ) 61,44 * 70 = 4.3 gb if i'm correct ?
<http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.c
for this
topic?
7. Do you see any other errors or warnings in the logs, even if it's not
immediately obvious how/if they would relate to the behavior you described?
No other errors
--
View this message in context:
http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabbl
opic://some.topic:memory: usage change from:
10694% of available memory, to: 10695% of available memory
Flow control is enabled, and messages are being published as persistent.
What should I make of this message?
--
View this message in context: http://activemq.2283324.n4.
nabble.com/How
s are being published as persistent.
What should I make of this message?
--
View this message in context:
http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/How-can-memory-usage-be-at-10-000-of-available-memory-tp4726425.html
Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
o the memoryUsage limit.
The ability to configure as a percentage of the memoryUsage limit would be
even better.
--
View this message in context:
http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/Configuring-destination-memory-usage-with-wild-cards-tp4719808p4719844.html
Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailing list ar
e limits are applied to each destination that matches the pattern.
>
> On Dec 6, 2016 10:15 AM, "rth" wrote:
>
>> If you configure memory usage with a policyEntry using a wildcard, does
>> each
>> destination that matches get that much memory?
>>
>> For
The limits are applied to each destination that matches the pattern.
On Dec 6, 2016 10:15 AM, "rth" wrote:
> If you configure memory usage with a policyEntry using a wildcard, does
> each
> destination that matches get that much memory?
>
> For instance, if I have this
If you configure memory usage with a policyEntry using a wildcard, does each
destination that matches get that much memory?
For instance, if I have this in my configuration file:
And I have two topics, /results.1/ and /results.2/.
Will each topic get 1MB of memory? Or will they share 1MB of
Hello Joerg,
your questions are also interesting to me.
Is there already new knowledge?
Thank you so much!
Regards,
JoRo
--
View this message in context:
http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/ActiveMQ-memory-usage-persistent-messaging-cursor-usage-and-PFC-tp4712042p4712923.html
Sent from
nposta.com/activemq/activemq-understanding-memory-usage/
<http://blog.christianposta.com/activemq/activemq-understanding-memory-usage/>
)
I've built up a small test system and I see that the system behaviour is not
as I would expect.
Here is my configuration:
-ActiveMQ version 5.13.3
-brok
d 5.9.1 ,5.10.0.
--
View this message in context:
http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/Network-connector-cause-memory-usage-not-count-down-tp4685296.html
Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Please help with the following issues we are encountering:
1. Broker Memory Usage is reaching 100%, we are not sure of the root cause,
however we believe it might be related to high load.
We have completed a heap dump and can see the percentUsage of one
org.apache.activemq.usage.MemoryUsage is
Please note we are using the following:
ActiveMQ: 5.5.1
Jrockit: Oracle JRockit(R) (build
R28.2.4-14-151097-1.6.0_33-20120618-1634-linux-x86_64, compiled mode)
artnaseef wrote
> If I understand correctly, the issue is reaching 100% memory usage. Are
> the attempts to increase memory us
If I understand correctly, the issue is reaching 100% memory usage. Are the
attempts to increase memory usage by spamming the broker intended to
reproduce the problem?
To find where memory is being used, look at QueueSize, for Queues, and
PendingQueueSize, for Topics, attributes of the Queue and
the server is doing nothing but gc. no client can connect to it. even
the hawtio.
next time I will save the jstack and jmap result
On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 5:53 AM, Christian Posta
wrote:
> can you show stack traces next time it happens so we can see what the
> broker was trying to do when it "hang
can you show stack traces next time it happens so we can see what the
broker was trying to do when it "hanged"? And what constituted
hanging? Couldn't send more messages, couldn't receive messages?
On Fri, Mar 28, 2014 at 12:23 AM, Li Li wrote:
> I am using the default configuration(maximum 4G he
sorry max heap is 1G, not 4G
On Fri, Mar 28, 2014 at 3:23 PM, Li Li wrote:
> I am using the default configuration(maximum 4G heap) and percentOfJvmHeap="70" />
> I send many small size TextMessages to server and it hangs
>
> I use jmap -heap and found that the free memory is less than 100MB and
I am using the default configuration(maximum 4G heap) and
I send many small size TextMessages to server and it hangs
I use jmap -heap and found that the free memory is less than 100MB and
the server can do nothing but do gc. but gc can't free anything.
client can't even connect to server.
I use .
I haven't been able to figure out how to configure peer transport in the XML
file. Has anybody done that? There doesn't seem to be any documentation
about it.
--
View this message in context:
http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/configuring-memory-usage-with-peer-transport-tp46744
; brokerName="MyActiveMQBroker"
> brokerURL="peer://groupa/broker1?persistent=false"/>
>
> It's working fine, but when I upgraded to ActiveMQ 5.9, I get an ERROR
> message in the log on startup:
>
> ERROR .activemq.broker.BrokerService Memory Usage for the B
I'm using ActiveMQ inside tomcat using the peer transport. My Tomcat
server.xml has:
It's working fine, but when I upgraded to ActiveMQ 5.9, I get an ERROR
message in the log on startup:
ERROR .activemq.broker.BrokerService Memory Usage for the Broker (1024 mb)
is more than t
n so that the
StoreDurableSubscriberCursor lastly created and used doesn't have the
TopicStorePrefetch instance in it.
Please review all the above that I demonstrated and explained here and
possibly confirm.
Regards,
Jake
--
View this message in context:
http://activemq.2283324
; processing was the third. In other words, at runtime,
> StoreDurableSubscriberCursor instance was working without any
> TopicStorePrefetch cursor inside...
>
> I'm looking into the sources more to know why this is happening...
--
View this message in context:
http://activemq
happening...
--
View this message in context:
http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/cursor-memory-usage-limit-vs-memory-usage-limit-tp4669679p4670035.html
Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
And, this is the pom.xml I use...
pom.xml <http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/file/n4670033/pom.xml>
--
View this message in context:
http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/cursor-memory-usage-limit-vs-memory-usage-limit-tp4669679p4670033.html
Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailin
broker.getBrokerService().setPersistent(true);
>> return cursor;
>> }
>> });
>>
>>
>> I'm curious what difference is there between these two
>> "PendingDurableSubscriberPolicy"s particularly for the persist
se two
> "PendingDurableSubscriberPolicy"s particularly for the persistent pending
> cursor used inside.. Strange..
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> View this message in context:
> http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/cursor-memory-usage-limit-vs-memory-usage-limit-tp4669679p4670029.html
> Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
--
*Christian Posta*
http://www.christianposta.com/blog
twitter: @christianposta
true);
return cursor;
}
});
I'm curious what difference is there between these two
"PendingDurableSubscriberPolicy"s particularly for the persistent pending
cursor used inside.. Strange..
--
View this message in context:
http://activemq
s relation with the backlog size (cached pending list
>> > size) but I think it should do only for non-persistent message
>> publishing.
>> > Why do we need to block persistent message publishing by memory limit?
>> > Persistent messages could be contributing to
gt; > I understand PFC has relation with the backlog size (cached pending list
> > size) but I think it should do only for non-persistent message
> publishing.
> > Why do we need to block persistent message publishing by memory limit?
> > Persistent messages could be contributing
eed to block persistent message publishing by memory limit?
> Persistent messages could be contributing to the memory usage but until
> the cache limit is reached with the high-watermark (70%). After that,
> broker can disable the cache/stopping caching(cursor dispatching) the
> persist
lock persistent message publishing by memory limit?
Persistent messages could be contributing to the memory usage but until the
cache limit is reached with the high-watermark (70%). After that, broker
can disable the cache/stopping caching(cursor dispatching) the persistent
message but keep writing onl
Thanks for the test...
I played around with it for a bit, and everything seems to work as I
expected.
Memory usage for durable subs on topics only kicks in when dispatch to the
consumer has already hit the prefetch limit. That means, try altering your
prefetch limits, and you'll notice tha
>> Thanks a lot Christian for the well-explained documentation and this
>> explains
>> why I'm seeing the trouble with topic durable subscriptions regarding the
>> per-destination memory usage & limit.
>>
>> First, let me quote some from your writing:
>
xplained documentation and this
> explains
> why I'm seeing the trouble with topic durable subscriptions regarding the
> per-destination memory usage & limit.
>
> First, let me quote some from your writing:
>
> "Main Broker Memory, Destination Memory, Subscription Memory
&
Thanks a lot Christian for the well-explained documentation and this explains
why I'm seeing the trouble with topic durable subscriptions regarding the
per-destination memory usage & limit.
First, let me quote some from your writing:
"Main Broker Memory, Destination Memory, Subsc
I have written a little about this.. maybe check out:
http://www.christianposta.com/blog/?p=273
On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 11:34 AM, Jake Choi wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Using activemq-core-5.7.0 (embedded broker), I noticed that there is the
> separate memory usage/limit called "cursor m
Hi,
Using activemq-core-5.7.0 (embedded broker), I noticed that there is the
separate memory usage/limit called "cursor memory usage/limit" which the
per-destination memory limit (that I set via per-destination policy) doesn't
account for, but shared between all queues. For exampl
The preceding messages in transactions can succeed in occupying the message
cursor memory/cache
but the subsequent messages in pending transactions increase the memory usage
at first to exceed
the memory usage limit so they are unable to put into the cursor cache anymore
when committing
;> >> >>
>> >> >> When one consumer of one queue becomes very slow since it's located
>> in
>> >> >> London,
>> >> >> far from our data center in china, our single producer becomes very
>> slow
>> >>
ssages.
> >> >> What phenomenon we observed is that:
> >> >> When the slow consumer located in London dequeues 200 messages the
> >> single
> >> >> producer can publish 200 messages or it will be blocked.
> >> >> It seems that PF
sumer located in London dequeues 200 messages the
>> single
>> >> producer can publish 200 messages or it will be blocked.
>> >> It seems that PFC is working but I ensure I have disabled PFC for queues
>> >> when the broker is deployed in production.
>> &
s working but I ensure I have disabled PFC for queues
> >> when the broker is deployed in production.
> >> But PFC for topics is enabled and I have make that disabled and given
> the
> >> broker a reboot.
> >> After that my producer can keep publishing
production.
>> But PFC for topics is enabled and I have make that disabled and given the
>> broker a reboot.
>> After that my producer can keep publishing messages regardless of the slow
>> consumer but the memory usage limit keeps increasing all the time.
>> Eventuall
orking but I ensure I have disabled PFC for queues
> when the broker is deployed in production.
> But PFC for topics is enabled and I have make that disabled and given the
> broker a reboot.
> After that my producer can keep publishing messages regardless of the slow
> consume
the memory is
exhausted b/w unreasonable memory usage limit configuration for queues, the
producer gets blocked in the topic eventually.So I can see the phenomenon
once the slow consumer enqueues 200 messages the producer can resume to send
200 messages.
There is some room to optimize the send logic
I'm really sorry for the confusion, but despite of what I wrote in my last
post, the problem with the NIO+SSL NIOTransport huge memory usage is still
there.
Unfortunately, the abnormal memory consumption is also triggered by pure SSL
transport (broker-side).
AMQ version 5.8.0
NMS ve
sense to you?
Thank you!
matteo
--
View this message in context:
http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/Abnormal-NIOTransport-memory-usage-tp4665860p4665885.html
Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
e way, with activemq 5.6.0, the very same CMS client used to work
correctly (no abnormal memory usage at the broker side).
The connection string at the c# peer is
Thank you very much,
matteo
--
View this message in context:
http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/Abnormal-NIOTransport-memory-
ation (if this makes sense, of
course).
Thank you very much!
matteo
--
View this message in context:
http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/Abnormal-NIOTransport-memory-usage-tp4665860.html
Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
--
Tim Bish
Sr Software Eng
d how I
could limit the NIOTransport memory allocation (if this makes sense, of
course).
Thank you very much!
matteo
--
View this message in context:
http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/Abnormal-NIOTransport-memory-usage-tp4665860.html
Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailing list archi
well, I will file a jira to track this issue.
--
View this message in context:
http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/What-can-be-reason-of-460-memory-usage-limit-tp4665651p4665847.html
Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
ory
limits combined are higher than the overall system limit. These settings
must be taken into account.
-
http://www.christianposta.com/blog
--
View this message in context:
http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/What-can-be-reason-of-460-memory-usage-limit-tp4665651p4665807.html
Sent from th
add a test case to demonstrate the exceeded memory usage percent.
When the memory usage limit of queues is larger than the global/broker
memory usage limit and PFC is disable, the exceeded memory usage percent is
present.I believe this is a unsuitable configuration while the broker keeps
dumb
activemq26.xml
<http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/file/n4665795/activemq26.xml>
please see the attachment.
--
View this message in context:
http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/What-can-be-reason-of-460-memory-usage-limit-tp4665651p4665795.html
Sent from the ActiveMQ - User m
ep publishing messages regardless of the slow
> consumer but the memory usage limit keeps increasing all the time.
> Eventually I saw the 460+ memory usage limit reached which made me very
> surprised.
> AFAIK, the pending messages in transactions can contribute to the exceeded
&g
t disabled and given the
broker a reboot.
After that my producer can keep publishing messages regardless of the slow
consumer but the memory usage limit keeps increasing all the time.
Eventually I saw the 460+ memory usage limit reached which made me very
surprised.
AFAIK, the pending m
sources.
try {
delete connection;
connection = NULL;
} catch (CMSException& e) {
e.printStackTrace();
}
std::cout << "---------\n";
std::cout << "Finis
age in context:
> http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/xmx-and-memory-usage-tp4660277.html
> Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
>
> If you reply to this email, your message will be added to the discussion
> below:
> http://activemq.2283324
> What about the spokes (the receivers)? Similar memory usage?
yes, remember a networks are store and forward. so each spoke gets a
message send and dispatches to its connected consumers in the same way
as the hub responds to a send.
On 8 November 2012 12:38, James Green wrote:
>
> As
What about the spokes (the receivers)? Similar memory usage?
As to stomp clients they report an "unable to connect" to localhost.
On 8 November 2012 11:46, Gary Tully wrote:
> There will be a single copy of the message but it will by default get
> marshaled in parallel due
consumer will not
block dispatch to other consumers but it will contribute to the memory
usage.
If the memory limits allow, on the send, the message will be retained
in memory and dispatched from memory.
It would be great to get a handle on why the stomp clients on the spoke die?
is it inactivity
Using the Camel File component to consume files from a directory. Works fine,
but once in a week, ActiveMQ is out-of-heap space. Have been experimenting with
Xmm and Xms (currently "-Xms384M -Xmx384M"), but higher values just delay the
moment where it goes out-of-heap. With jConsole, it's clear
:
>>>>
>>>>> ActiveMQ users list:
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm getting the following in my activemq.log file. It would appear
>>>>> that temp is full. Where is temp for activemq and how do I increase
>>>>> its size?
>&
27;m getting the following in my activemq.log file. It would appear
>>>> that temp is full. Where is temp for activemq and how do I increase
>>>> its size?
>>>>
>>>> 2012-05-28 06:16:43,329 [.250.6.35:55969] INFO TopicSubscription
>>>> -
e is temp for activemq and how do I increase
>>> its size?
>>>
>>> 2012-05-28 06:16:43,329 [.250.6.35:55969] INFO TopicSubscription
>>>- TopicSubscription:
>>> consumer=ID:activemqserver.example.com-42060-1338122477013-3:6179:-1:1,
>>> d
opicSubscription:
>> consumer=ID:activemqserver.example.com-42060-1338122477013-3:6179:-1:1,
>> destinations=1, dispatched=1000, delivered=958, matched=2079,
>> discarded=0: Pending message cursor
>> [org.apache.activemq.broker.region.cursors.FilePendingMessageCursor@5753f3e3]
>&g
activemqserver.example.com-42060-1338122477013-3:6179:-1:1,
> destinations=1, dispatched=1000, delivered=958, matched=2079,
> discarded=0: Pending message cursor
> [org.apache.activemq.broker.region.cursors.FilePendingMessageCursor@5753f3e3]
> is full, temp usage (100%) or memory usage (69%) limit r
sumer=ID:activemqserver.example.com-42060-1338122477013-3:6179:-1:1,
destinations=1, dispatched=1000, delivered=958, matched=2079,
discarded=0: Pending message cursor
[org.apache.activemq.broker.region.cursors.FilePendingMessageCursor@5753f3e3]
is full, temp usage (100%) or memory usage (69%) limit reached,
blocking messag
what type of out of memory error occurred.
Thomas
> -Original Message-
> From: nnprasad [mailto:nnakarika...@dwd.in.gov]
> Sent: 05 April 2011 16:01
> To: users@activemq.apache.org
> Subject: RE: ActiveMQ Memory Usage is going up when there is no
> activity
>
>
> T
should furnish in my activemq.xml file.
After your mail, I did some research and found this...-
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AMQ-2103
any more suggestions / comments are welcomed.
Thank You
Nag.
--
View this message in context:
http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/ActiveMQ-Memory
small sawtooths on the
graph). Only when memory is getting overly full does it try more aggressive
(and time consuming) GC cycles - or when you press the button on console.
In term of memory usage there are probably a whole load of temporary short
lived objects which may accumulate over time ev
://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/file/n3426037/activemq.xml
activemq.xml
I could not understand Why ActiveMQ is consuming and increasing its Memory
usage, when there is no activity on queues.
It seems no GC thread running in ActiveMQ, because when ever I am running
Perform GC in JConsole the graph
If you haven't already, try reading this:
http://activemq.apache.org/javalangoutofmemory.html
On 2 November 2010 10:51, Manuel Teira Paz wrote:
> Hello all.
> I'm working into the migration from activemq 4.1 to activemq 5.4.1. One
> of the things we have noticed is a sensible growth in both mem
Hello all.
I'm working into the migration from activemq 4.1 to activemq 5.4.1. One
of the things we have noticed is a sensible growth in both memory and
number of thread usage of our application.
I would like to know if this is the expected behaviour, and also gain
some insights in what threads a
To: users@activemq.apache.org; Rob Davies
Subject: RE: ActiveMQ 5.3.0 Memory Usage - Connections
Hi,
Back to 5.3.0, I tried changing the Queue to a Durable Topic.
Producer - > Durable Topic - > Server - > Durable Topic - >
Consumer
"Tenured Gen" is no longer a memory heap optio
wrote:
>
> Thanks Gary!
>
> I have tried 5.3.1 and my application doesn't die. But the "Memory usage"
> message is still there.
> I have discovery that in production I have a lot of messages in queues that
> doesn't have any consumers. So the ActiveMQ Scheduler was wor
Thanks Gary!
I have tried 5.3.1 and my application doesn't die. But the "Memory usage"
message is still there.
I have discovery that in production I have a lot of messages in queues that
doesn't have any consumers. So the ActiveMQ Scheduler was working hard on
every messa
ril 2010 23:53, moacsjr wrote:
>
> Please Help,
> I'm using camel 1.6.2 with active mq 5.3.0.
>
> I have an application that proccess a very large amount of messages and
> after a while the application stops.
> In the log I can see many messages about memory usage increasin
Please Help,
I'm using camel 1.6.2 with active mq 5.3.0.
I have an application that proccess a very large amount of messages and
after a while the application stops.
In the log I can see many messages about memory usage increasing:
(ActiveMQ Scheduler) - Memory usage change from: 31
> that defaults to 70% of system usage. your config can go to 80%
>
> On 7 April 2010 12:15, Richard Holt wrote:
>
>>
>> Hi Gary,
>>
>> It appears i am really not understanding this so could you clarify?
>>
>> You wrote:
>>
>> "W
wrote:
>
> "Which ever destination tips it over the limit will have its memory usage
> flushed to disk because it is
> configured with a fileQueueCursor."
>
> and then wrote:
>
> "The salient point being that paging to disk is dependent on systemUsage
>
Hi Gary,
It appears i am really not understanding this so could you clarify?
You wrote:
"Which ever destination tips it over the limit will have its memory usage
flushed to disk because it is
configured with a fileQueueCursor."
and then wrote:
"The salient point being that pa
1 - 100 of 168 matches
Mail list logo
