I should mention though that I did see settings for the new servicemix-jms
endpoints actually that should solve the problems I'm having, but I don't
think any of them work. I'll try them again and let you know which ones and
then you can tell me if I'm screwing up and using them wrong, though they
aren't complicated so I can't imagine I'm using them wrong.
On Wed, Aug 20, 2008 at 5:05 PM, Bruce Snyder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:
> 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/
>
