Hi JB,

thanks for your feedback.

Currently, we are using both, camel-activemq and the activemqbroker.
But the displayed difference is only when adding the camel-activemq feature.

As the application was based on servicemix before, this behavior is still an 
old relict 😉.
I’ll try to change everything to jms and come back  with the result.

If camel-activemq is still based on camel2, might it be a good idea, to mark it 
as deprecated, with the hint to replace it by camel-jms?

Kind regards,
Joerg

From: Jean-Baptiste Onofre <j...@nanthrax.net>
Sent: Donnerstag, 20. Mai 2021 06:06
To: user <user@karaf.apache.org>
Subject: Re: Memory usage camel-activemq & karaf 4.3.1

Hi Joerg,

Do you install "just" camel-activemq feature or activemq-broker one as well ?

I guess it doesn’t happen if you use camel-jms ?

Generally speaking, I recommend to use camel-jms instead of camel-activemq. The 
main reason is that camel-activemq is still Camel 2.x and you are using Camel 
3.x. You can achieve quite the same thing with camel-jms.

Regards
JB


Le 19 mai 2021 à 20:44, Jörg Jansen 
<joerg.jan...@inform-software.com<mailto:joerg.jan...@inform-software.com>> a 
écrit :

Good evening everybody,

Currently I’m using camel-3.7.4 and karaf 4.3.1.
I’ve recognized a strange behavior, when using camel-activemq feature.

It seems, that from karaf version 4.3.1 the memory usage “explodes”, as soon as 
the temporary data are created during startup.
After a while, the memory usage is decreasing again but at startup it rexerved 
up to ~2GB of memory.

In the picture below, you can see the occupied memory, in case I startup karaf 
without the camel-activemq feature. Here, the allocated memory is 512MB wihch 
is fine.
<image002.png>

In the following picture, you can see the startup with camel-activemq as a boo 
feature.
<image001.png>

I hope this is the correct mailing list, or should belong the camel one?
In that case please bothering you 😊

Wondering if anyone else recognized this behavior.

Any help would be very appreciated!

Kind regards,
Joerg

Reply via email to