On Wed, Aug 20, 2008 at 2:49 PM, Ryan Moquin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I don't think I saw that option? I assumed the timetolive would have that
> effect? I'll take another look at the settings, I may have overlooked that
> one. I hope so because I'm getting pretty desperate and I'm positive that
> I've correctly tried all the other options correctly, which is why I'm so
> puzzled.
OK, my mistake in suggesting the use of the expiration. I just tested
the expiration and the timeToLive on the JMS message in ActiveMQ 4.1.1
and 5.1. The expiration doesn't seem to have any affect on either
broker, but the timeToLive does. In ActiveMQ 4.1.1, the timeToLive
doesn't affect message expiration but in ActiveMQ 5.1, setting a
timeToLive will cause the message to be delivered to the DLQ if the
timeToLive surpasses and the message is still pending.
Bruce
--
perl -e 'print unpack("u30","D0G)[EMAIL
PROTECTED]&5R\"F)R=6-E+G-N>61E<D\!G;6%I;\"YC;VT*"
);'
Apache ActiveMQ - http://activemq.org/
Apache Camel - http://activemq.org/camel/
Apache ServiceMix - http://servicemix.org/
Blog: http://bruceblog.org/
