The patch was indicated to have been tested against the ActiveMQ trunk /
5.10-SNAPSHOT, so something probably changed on the ActiveMQ side since
5.9.0 was released.
Probably this: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AMQ-4741
Robbie
On 21 February 2014 00:49, Rob Godfrey wrote:
> On 21 Februa
he test environment/scenario.
Thanks again,
Mark.
-Original Message-
From: Rob Godfrey
Sent: Thursday, February 20, 2014 5:49 PM
To: users@qpid.apache.org
Subject: Re: New User JMS API Questions
On 21 February 2014 01:38, Rob Godfrey wrote:
On 21 February 2014 01:15, Mark Barker w
On 21 February 2014 01:38, Rob Godfrey wrote:
>
>
>
> On 21 February 2014 01:15, Mark Barker wrote:
>
>> Thanks for the help, Rob.
>> Here's some more feedback from today's experiments.
>>
>> I tried the setDeliveryMode on my 'basic' producer client (AMQP 1.0
>> client interacting only with Acti
nt seems to
> hang on
> >>> the producer.send() call with this 0.27 client (with the ActiveMQ
> broker on
> >>> its AMQP transport connector). The message has indeed been placed in
> the
> >>> queue nominated on the broker, since if I CTRL-C out of the producer
API
>>> test .jar), the message is subsequently received seemingly intact (at least
>>> the TextMessage body is as expected).
>>>
>>> More news tomorrow, but I wanted you to know this bit.
>>>
>>> Thanks again for your help thus far.
>>
t;>
>> More news tomorrow, but I wanted you to know this bit.
>>
>> Thanks again for your help thus far.
>>
>> Mark.
>>
>>
>>
>> -Original Message- From: Robbie Gemmell
>> Sent: Wednesday, February 19, 2014 5:09 PM
>>
>> To:
y received seemingly intact (at least
> the TextMessage body is as expected).
>
> More news tomorrow, but I wanted you to know this bit.
>
> Thanks again for your help thus far.
>
> Mark.
>
>
>
> -Original Message- From: Robbie Gemmell
> Sent: Wednesday, F
ected).
More news tomorrow, but I wanted you to know this bit.
Thanks again for your help thus far.
Mark.
-Original Message-
From: Robbie Gemmell
Sent: Wednesday, February 19, 2014 5:09 PM
To: users@qpid.apache.org
Subject: Re: New User JMS API Questions
I forced the nightly releas
If this is the case, what is the best way to solve this problem.
> >>> >> If msg has a number of header and application-defined property
> >>> attributes
> >>> >> (never minding the body), how exactly is client2 supposed to
> >>> copy/prese
pposed to
>>> copy/preserve
>>> >> them all across into a TextMessage object implementation suitable for
>>> >> delivery to Q2. Will client2 need to know the exact structure of the
>>> >> messages in order to deconstruct and reconstruct to satisfy the
&
e
>> > created or received from a different JMS provider... these are known as
>> > "foreign" messages in JMS terms. The exception is that Destinations
>> (such
>> > as those found in the JMSReplyTo field) are provider specific. However
>> if
>&
#x27;t believe
> > there should be any other issues as long as the messages are conformant
> > with the JMS specification (note that many providers may "extend" the JMS
> > specification to allow for non standard behaviours such as allowing map
> > messages t
your
> issue... the error you are seeing sounds more like it is to do with trying
> to send to a queue which doesn't exist, however I can't find the error text
> you pasted in the Qpid codebase anywhere... Would it be possible to paste
> in the complete stack trace (or at least all the bits th
lete stack trace (or at least all the bits that are within the
qpid code if you want to remove any confidential parts from your own
program)?
Thanks,
Rob
> As ever, any help with this would be hugely appreciated...
> Thanks in advance,
> Mark.
>
>
> -Original Message---
neral instead of p2p/pub-sub). Is that syntax a feature of the
AMQP
protocol, or something specific to the Qpid client or ActiveMQ broker? I
can't find much mention of it anywhere.
That's something specific to the ActiveMQ broker.
Thanks again for giving these questions your atte
s something specific to the ActiveMQ broker.
> Thanks again for giving these questions your attention!!
>
>
>
-- Rob
>
> -Original Message- From: Robbie Gemmell
> Sent: Saturday, February 15, 2014 2:57 PM
>
> To: users@qpid.apache.org
> Subject: Re: New User JMS
ell
Sent: Saturday, February 15, 2014 2:57 PM
To: users@qpid.apache.org
Subject: Re: New User JMS API Questions
On 14 February 2014 04:55, Mark Barker wrote:
If anyone has a tried this, or can confirm:
will it be possible to have a JMS client using an ActiveMQ broker on one
machine (or maybe a p
On 16 February 2014 09:53, Fraser Adams wrote:
> On 15/02/14 21:55, Robbie Gemmell wrote:
>
>> [snip]
>>
>>
>> In terms of a 'topic', this needs to be something that supports the
>> semantics of the pub-sub model, but there are a number of ways to achieve
>> that. We currently have brokers that ha
On 15/02/14 21:55, Robbie Gemmell wrote:
[snip]
In terms of a 'topic', this needs to be something that supports the
semantics of the pub-sub model, but there are a number of ways to achieve
that. We currently have brokers that have models containing 'exchanges'
that have been used for that histo
nest.
> Thanks once again for all the help as I get to grips with this new subject
> matter.
>
> Mark
>
>
>
> -Original Message- From: Robbie Gemmell
> Sent: Wednesday, February 12, 2014 11:09 AM
>
> To: users@qpid.apache.org
> Subject: Re: New User JMS API
hanges with AMQP 1.0?
>
> Thanks, Jan
>
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Robbie Gemmell [mailto:robbie.gemm...@gmail.com]
> > Sent: Wednesday, February 12, 2014 7:09 PM
> > To: users@qpid.apache.org
> > Subject: Re: New User JMS API Questions
> >
> &
w subject
matter.
Mark
-Original Message-
From: Robbie Gemmell
Sent: Wednesday, February 12, 2014 11:09 AM
To: users@qpid.apache.org
Subject: Re: New User JMS API Questions
Hi Mark,
Is your work email address registered on the list? if not the message may
be awaiting moderation.
P
rg
> Subject: Re: New User JMS API Questions
>
> Hi Mark,
>
> Is your work email address registered on the list? if not the message may
> be awaiting moderation.
>
> Part of the issue is that you are definitely tripping up on a mixture of
> JNDI configuration, some of
Hi Mark,
Is your work email address registered on the list? if not the message may
be awaiting moderation.
Part of the issue is that you are definitely tripping up on a mixture of
JNDI configuration, some of which is of the newer 'Address' syntax variety
and some which is of the older 'Binding UR
24 matches
Mail list logo
