+1 for (a)
On 7 August 2012 19:11, Gordon Sim wrote:
> So, to follow up and summarise this thread so far, the only contentious
> point has been the loss of the 'flow to disk' functionality.
>
> Though the current solution doesn't limit the memory used by a large
> queue, it can in certain cases
+1 for (a)
On Tue, 2012-08-07 at 19:11 +0100, Gordon Sim wrote:
> So, to follow up and summarise this thread so far, the only contentious
> point has been the loss of the 'flow to disk' functionality.
>
> Though the current solution doesn't limit the memory used by a large
> queue, it can in ce
Hi All,
Can anybody point me to a guide that could help me to setup Kerberos to
work with Qpid?
I've been trying to follow the steps described in the User Manual, but
Qpid still uses its SASL database for authentication.
Best,
Davide Anastasia
Analyst, Research & Development
Quality Cap
On Aug 8, 2012, at 11:25 AM, Rajith Attapattu wrote:
> +1 for (a).
>
+1 from me as well.
> Rajith
>
> On Tue, Aug 7, 2012 at 2:16 PM, Andy Goldstein
> wrote:
>> My vote is for (a)
>>
>> Andy
>>
>> On Aug 7, 2012, at 2:11 PM, Gordon Sim wrote:
>>
>>> So, to follow up and summarise this th
+1 for (a).
Rajith
On Tue, Aug 7, 2012 at 2:16 PM, Andy Goldstein
wrote:
> My vote is for (a)
>
> Andy
>
> On Aug 7, 2012, at 2:11 PM, Gordon Sim wrote:
>
>> So, to follow up and summarise this thread so far, the only contentious
>> point has been the loss of the 'flow to disk' functionality.
>
+1 for (a)
On Tue, Aug 7, 2012 at 11:11 AM, Gordon Sim wrote:
> So, to follow up and summarise this thread so far, the only contentious
> point has been the loss of the 'flow to disk' functionality.
>
> Though the current solution doesn't limit the memory used by a large queue,
> it can in certai
