FYI. I got the persistence working. I check out the latest qpid
and store from the svn and now it seems to be working.
Daryoush
On Wed, Dec 14, 2011 at 1:31 PM, Daryoush Mehrtash wrote:
> I got the latest SVN check out of the QPid
> (https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/qpid/trunk/qpid) and
On 12/15/2011 03:14 PM, Pavel Moravec wrote:
Hi Gordon,
- Original Message -
From: "Gordon Sim"
To: users@qpid.apache.org
Sent: Thursday, December 15, 2011 3:33:22 PM
Subject: Re: Weird behavior of flow_to_disk policy
On 12/13/2011 03:33 PM, Pavel Moravec wrote:
Hi all,
I noticed a we
On 12/14/2011 01:47 AM, Ilyushonak Barys wrote:
Hi, Andy
Yes, we are using clustering.
The issue is that the broker I tested is a single broker. There is no cluster
setup.
The drain command against this single broker shows me all my other clusters.
I don't know any way that can happen unless t
Hi Gordon,
- Original Message -
> From: "Gordon Sim"
> To: users@qpid.apache.org
> Sent: Thursday, December 15, 2011 3:33:22 PM
> Subject: Re: Weird behavior of flow_to_disk policy
>
> On 12/13/2011 03:33 PM, Pavel Moravec wrote:
> > Hi all,
> > I noticed a weird behavior of flow-to-disk
On 12/09/2011 07:58 PM, Fraser Adams wrote:
Gordon Sim wrote:
I wouldn't consider these addressing examples as canonical reference
material! The Programming in Apache Qpid book is a bit of a mixture of
things. I'm not yet sure if or how these would fit in with that. In
the meantime I wanted to
On 12/13/2011 03:33 PM, Pavel Moravec wrote:
Hi all,
I noticed a weird behavior of flow-to-disk policy. When the relevant queue is utilized
over its max-queue-count and when I am sending and receiving messages there, my sender
gets "Enqueue capacity threshold".
One particular scenario:
qpid-co
