We have also proved that we can horizontally scale the Camel deployment
> > based on queue depth.
> >
> > What we can't work out is how to put the two solutions together, as
> whilst
> > Message Group will rebalance when a consumer disconnects, it does not
> >
t; be considerably more groups than consumers, so I have no concerns about
> consumers being idle because all groups are already serviced.
>
> We have also proved that we can horizontally scale the Camel deployment
> based on queue depth.
>
> What we can't work out is how t
proved that we can horizontally scale the Camel deployment
based on queue depth.
What we can't work out is how to put the two solutions together, as whilst
Message Group will rebalance when a consumer disconnects, it does not
rebalance on new consumers, according to the documentation.
27;s better to
> be resilient and have strict order guarantee and exponential backoff
> retries to cover problems with external integrations.
> And by using message-groups it allows us to only lock messages that
> are on the same message-group, while allowing another messages to
> process no
etries to cover problems with external integrations.
And by using message-groups it allows us to only lock messages that
are on the same message-group, while allowing another messages to
process normally, that is exactly the use case we want.
Cheers,
On Tue, 2 Jun 2020 at 17:22, Justin Bertram wr
ol wrote:
> ActiveMQ Artemis
>
> On Tue, 2 Jun 2020 at 16:22, Justin Bertram wrote:
> >
> > Are you asking about ActiveMQ 5.x or ActiveMQ Artemis?
> >
> >
> > Justin
> >
> > On Tue, Jun 2, 2020 at 9:19 AM Joan Pujol wrote:
> >
> > &g
ActiveMQ Artemis.
On Tue, 2 Jun 2020 at 16:22, Justin Bertram wrote:
>
> Are you asking about ActiveMQ 5.x or ActiveMQ Artemis?
>
>
> Justin
>
> On Tue, Jun 2, 2020 at 9:19 AM Joan Pujol wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > Searching in mailing list archives fo
ActiveMQ Artemis
On Tue, 2 Jun 2020 at 16:22, Justin Bertram wrote:
>
> Are you asking about ActiveMQ 5.x or ActiveMQ Artemis?
>
>
> Justin
>
> On Tue, Jun 2, 2020 at 9:19 AM Joan Pujol wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > Searching in mailing list archives for mes
Are you asking about ActiveMQ 5.x or ActiveMQ Artemis?
Justin
On Tue, Jun 2, 2020 at 9:19 AM Joan Pujol wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Searching in mailing list archives for message group and message
> redelivery I've seen different responses and it's not clear to me the
> suppo
Hi,
Searching in mailing list archives for message group and message
redelivery I've seen different responses and it's not clear to me the
supposed way to work.
If I had a queue with message groups is ordered guaranteed if broker
redeliveries are present?
That is if I have:
m1,m2, and
I continue testing the message group functionality but I am not sure if I am
missing something because I was not able to rebalance groups. I tried using
address-settings(default-group-rebalance), manually invoking resetAllGroups
and using "?group-rebalance=true".
Scenario:
Artemis
ys of scaling in case of needing
and as a learning process, because is ok going with a single broker (knowing
that in the future I will not able to scale out if needed).
We have several pieces in our architecture and just one of them needs the
message group functionality to ensure a serial processin
If you're going to be using message grouping in a cluster then you'll
definitely want to configure it properly (i.e. according to the
documentation you cited). That said, message grouping imposes a natural
penalty on performance due to the serialization of message consumption per
group. Generally s
After reading the documentation in more detail
"https://activemq.apache.org/components/artemis/documentation/latest/message-grouping.html";
it seems that I need to use "Clustered Grouping" for this use case.
I will try that
--
Sent from: http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/ActiveMQ-User-f2341
Hi,
I am trying to use message group and I think I am facing an issue, but I
would like to confirm before trying to fix it.
Scenario:
Artemis 2.9.0 Cluster (2 Nodes)
Queue: State (LVQ: true, Durable: Yes)
Consumer 1 --> Broker 1
Consumer 2 --> Broker 2
Producer Send Message to Br
UAL_ACK plus message groups plus enough consumers to keep all
messages in memory is the way to go; without it, things get much harder,
and maybe you need one destination per message group with a Camel route to
pull messages from a queue and move them to the right per-group destination?
Tim
Kevin
Searching git history, it appears the following commit introduced the change
back in 2013:
468e69765145ddad199963260e4774d179ad
That first appears in 5.9.0. So, it was longer ago than I realized ;-).
Cheers!
--
View this message in context:
http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/Message
than not that the item we wish to group on greatly exceeds 1024 hence
the effectiveness of the hashing method.
*>The default Message Group Map implementation was recently changed to use
an LRU Cache of message groups.*
When did this change? Perhaps I'm missing something but I've loo
The default Message Group Map implementation was recently changed to use an
LRU Cache of message groups.
Here's the issue with message groups - the broker does not know the set of
message group IDs ahead of time and must allow for any number of group IDs
to be used. If the total set of pos
han their fair share.
It's worth noting that if you plan to use message group sequence numbers
(for whatever reason) that you'll have to increment it's value yourself as
the broker doesn't manage the sequence id by default.
I hope this makes sense.
Thanks,
Paul
On Mon, J
ng. In a usual
hashmap implementation a bucket would store a certain number of hashed keys.
What does it matter if the key is stored or a hashed key is stored, and what
is the relation to the bucket?
Thanks in advance.
Derek
--
View this message in context:
http://activemq.228332
but you could potentially write the
> messages to some type of database but have the consumer just keep track of
> which messages it has (so you're storing a single bit-mapped integer for
> each message group instead of storing the full message content), and then
> read them back i
at would have to be overflowed. If that's
not reasonable, this gets harder, but you could potentially write the
messages to some type of database but have the consumer just keep track of
which messages it has (so you're storing a single bit-mapped integer for
each message group instead of sto
nto a group, and sent to C all at once,
in one composite message.
So its similar to map/reduce in a way in that C should execute once with a
block of these 15 messages.
Conceptually I'm calling them (message group checkpoints).. but I'm
wondering if there's already a more formal name fo
>
> > > Tim
> > > On Nov 10, 2015 2:20 PM, "sspind" wrote:
> > >
> > >> Hi there,
> > >>
> > >> a question related to message groups: is it possible to rebalance
> > message
> > >> groups when a new consumer
>>
> >> a question related to message groups: is it possible to rebalance
> message
> >> groups when a new consumer registers with the broker?
> >> In my setup I have two consumers that consume from the same queue where
> all
> >> messages have a message g
ters with the broker?
>> In my setup I have two consumers that consume from the same queue where all
>> messages have a message group ID. If one consumer loses connection all
>> messages go to the other. If the consumer reconnects messages will still go
>> to the other one. At l
spind" wrote:
> Hi there,
>
> a question related to message groups: is it possible to rebalance message
> groups when a new consumer registers with the broker?
> In my setup I have two consumers that consume from the same queue where all
> messages have a message gro
Hi there,
a question related to message groups: is it possible to rebalance message
groups when a new consumer registers with the broker?
In my setup I have two consumers that consume from the same queue where all
messages have a message group ID. If one consumer loses connection all
messages go
you again
--
View this message in context:
http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/Message-Group-tp4680478p4680481.html
Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
across message
group concept so I think it can help us but I am just worry that, if we use
multiple consumers and use that device_id as our JMSXGroupID, basically for
example all messages from device_id 205 and 105 will all go to the consumer1
, and all messaged from 102 and 202 go to consumer2 and so on
te to that engine. On top of that, it
would be possible to have 2 instances of the engine listening on each queue,
using JMSXGroup's, to ensure high availability and redundancy. Just a
thought...
--
View this message in context:
http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/Message-Group-tp46804
now see
that messages on queue behind 20k messages from one group do get processed
by a different consumer ..
--
View this message in context:
http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/Message-group-not-working-when-first-group-has-large-number-of-messages-tp4672269p4672312.html
Sent from
belonging to
different groups, the messages belonging to different groups get processed
serially instead of going to different consumer. We are using
simpleMessageGroupMapFactory policy as our Message group Ids can have any
long number. Is this is a known issue that is fixed in any subsequent
release
Well, I am doing some performance testing with Apache Camel and their
splitter performance is for our purposes slow.
So I started using the selector and JMS message groups together to avoid the
splitter.
--
View this message in context:
http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/JMS-message-groups-
I presume you mean message groups ? That's going to be a good thing to do if it
is.
On 12 Aug 2013, at 20:44, salemi wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I am planing to use JMS message group in conjunction for selector. Has
> anybody done it before?
>
> If I use both does it have perf
Everything is a tradeoff.
You may wish to come up with specific scenarios and use cases.
On Mon, Aug 12, 2013 at 12:44 PM, salemi wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I am planing to use JMS message group in conjunction for selector. Has
> anybody done it before?
>
> If I use both does i
Hi,
I am planing to use JMS message group in conjunction for selector. Has
anybody done it before?
If I use both does it have performance implications of the JMS broker?
Thanks
--
View this message in context:
http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/JMS-message-group-selectors-tp4670296.html
t; in http://activemq.apache.org/message-groups.html, there is a saying:
> > > Message
> > > Groups provide load balancing of the processing of messages across
> > multiple
> > > consumers.
> > >
> > > Although I read the whole article,
ctivemq.apache.org/message-groups.html, there is a saying:
> > Message
> > Groups provide load balancing of the processing of messages across
> multiple
> > consumers.
> >
> > Although I read the whole article, I have not understood the relation
> > between m
there is a saying:
> Message
> Groups provide load balancing of the processing of messages across multiple
> consumers.
>
> Although I read the whole article, I have not understood the relation
> between message group and load-balancing. After all, there has been
> load-balance alre
in http://activemq.apache.org/message-groups.html, there is a saying: Message
Groups provide load balancing of the processing of messages across multiple
consumers.
Although I read the whole article, I have not understood the relation
between message group and load-balancing. After all, there
---
> The experts in open source integration and messaging -
> http://fusesource.com
> ActiveMQ in Action - http://www.manning.com/snyder/
> Blog - http://www.nighttale.net
>
>
> On Mon, Dec 12, 2011 at 9:44 PM, Marcelo Jabali >wrote:
>
> > Hi Raul,
MQ in Action - http://www.manning.com/snyder/
Blog - http://www.nighttale.net
On Mon, Dec 12, 2011 at 9:44 PM, Marcelo Jabali wrote:
> Hi Raul,
>
> As far as I know, the Message Group is closed when the property
> JMSXGroupSeq is set to -1.
>
> Please raise a Jira to get that fixed
Hi Raul,
As far as I know, the Message Group is closed when the property JMSXGroupSeq is
set to -1.
Please raise a Jira to get that fixed…
I wrote something regarding that some time ago that should help as well…
http://marcelojabali.blogspot.com/2011/11/load-balanced-ordered-message.html
Did you figure out the fix?
--
View this message in context:
http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/Message-Group-Concurrent-Consumers-Issue-tp2367512p3466386.html
Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
behavior that would create a new consumer in the pool if a
consumer dies so that a fix number of consumer is available from the pool.
I saw in the documentation that the Message Group, I think, fits into the
requirement perfectly. Process messages asynchronous, maintain message
order, and failover
for other Messages owned by another ID. I also like to
> have the pool a behavior that would create a new consumer in the pool if a
> consumer dies so that a fix number of consumer is available from the pool.
>
> I saw in the documentation that the Message Group, I think, fits int
dies so that a fix number of consumer is available
from the pool.
I saw in the documentation that the Message Group, I think, fits into
the requirement perfectly. Process messages asynchronous, maintain
message order, and failover feature.
Unfortunately, I was not able to understand
ActiveMQ guru,
Our applications uses JMSXGroupID for sequential delivery. Now, we are
extending from one broker to a cluster of broker. Is there some deployment
architecture to achieve message group under the clusters of broker ?
Thanks
--
View this message in context:
http
Thanks!
odysseyfx wrote:
>
> I was reading the Message Group documentation, and it's very clear how you
> can post messages to a queue for a message group. However, it's not clear
> how a Consumer reads from a specific message group.
>
> Should I just us
On Wed, Apr 7, 2010 at 12:48 PM, odysseyfx wrote:
>
> I was reading the Message Group documentation, and it's very clear how you
> can post messages to a queue for a message group. However, it's not clear
> how a Consumer reads from a specific message group.
>
>
I was reading the Message Group documentation, and it's very clear how you
can post messages to a queue for a message group. However, it's not clear
how a Consumer reads from a specific message group.
Should I just use a message selector for the JMSXGroupID?
If that is true, then h
Hi,
I am using activeMQ 5.2
I wanted to test the message group feature of activeMQ 5.2. I setup 2
consumers (failover Master-slave) to a broker.
I used the activemq admin webpage to create some text messages with GroupID
"abc" and "def". Next I started those 2 consumers but i
On Fri, Aug 15, 2008 at 9:22 AM, Mark Webb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I would like to take advantage of the message group feature in ActiveMQ
> 5.1. After reading the page (http://activemq.apache.org/message-groups.html),
> I have a question.
>
> Is the message group
I would like to take advantage of the message group feature in ActiveMQ
5.1. After reading the page (http://activemq.apache.org/message-groups.html),
I have a question.
Is the message group feature for multiple consumers on the same
queue/topic?
What I mean is that in the example, there are
eNotWriteableException when u send a message with a new
>> message group. there is no such exception if the message group existed.
>>
>> if we use tcp://localhost:61616 as embedded broker use URL everything
>> work
>> fine.
>
> Which version are you using btw?
On 6/7/07, ryanafa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
The ActiveMQ is embedded in Jboss and the embedded broker use URL
vm://localhost
there is a MessageNotWriteableException when u send a message with a new
message group. there is no such exception if the message group existed.
if we u
The ActiveMQ is embedded in Jboss and the embedded broker use URL
vm://localhost
there is a MessageNotWriteableException when u send a message with a new
message group. there is no such exception if the message group existed.
if we use tcp://localhost:61616 as embedded broker use URL everything
59 matches
Mail list logo
