Hi,
I just gave it a quick test here using the latest 5.5 release and there does
indeed seem to be an issue.
Was sending and consuming msgs on the master broker using a new queue and the
JMX properties got updated correctly on both master and slave.
However when sending some msgs to queue example.A which also has a Camel
consumer connected, I noticed the same problem as reported here. On the slave
the Enqueue Count rises correctly but dequeue and dispatch count remain 0.
QueueSize is at EnqueueCount number, despite all msgs being consumed already.
I further noticed the following error in the slave log:
WARN | Async error occurred: java.lang.IllegalStateException: Cannot lookup a
connection that had not been registered:
ID:mac.fritz.box-53812-1315495654277-4:1
java.lang.IllegalStateException: Cannot lookup a connection that had not been
registered: ID:mac.fritz.box-53812-1315495654277-4:1
at
org.apache.activemq.broker.MapTransportConnectionStateRegister.lookupConnectionState(MapTransportConnectionStateRegister.java:97)
at
org.apache.activemq.broker.TransportConnection.lookupConnectionState(TransportConnection.java:1444)
at
org.apache.activemq.broker.TransportConnection.processRemoveProducer(TransportConnection.java:530)
at org.apache.activemq.command.RemoveInfo.visit(RemoveInfo.java:78)
at
org.apache.activemq.broker.TransportConnection.service(TransportConnection.java:316)
at
org.apache.activemq.broker.TransportConnection$1.onCommand(TransportConnection.java:180)
at
org.apache.activemq.transport.ResponseCorrelator.onCommand(ResponseCorrelator.java:116)
at
org.apache.activemq.transport.TransportFilter.onCommand(TransportFilter.java:69)
at
org.apache.activemq.transport.vm.VMTransport.iterate(VMTransport.java:218)
at
org.apache.activemq.thread.DedicatedTaskRunner.runTask(DedicatedTaskRunner.java:98)
at
org.apache.activemq.thread.DedicatedTaskRunner$1.run(DedicatedTaskRunner.java:36)
There seems to be a problem here.
Dan, if you have the time, could you raise a new JIRA for this problem?
Thanks,
Torsten Mielke
tors...@fusesource.com
tmie...@blogspot.com
On Sep 8, 2011, at 3:34 PM, Gary Tully wrote:
> there are quite a few issues backing up against the pure master slave
> (nothing shared) support, as a feature, it is not getting much love.
> Most folks use a shared file system or shared db, so shared store
> setup so that is where most of the work is focused.
> A 2 broker network can give your producers some level of fault
> tolerance, but total order of messages will be lost and any messages
> pending on a failed broker will remain there till it is restarted.
> Best a network of shared store master/slave pairs
>
> On 8 September 2011 13:05, dcheckoway <dchecko...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Torsten/Gary,
>>
>> This (thread) talks about the master/slave issue I made reference to
>> earlier...
>>
>> -----
>> Dan Checkoway
>> dcheckoway gmail com
>> --
>> View this message in context:
>> http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/Slave-not-replicating-consumption-with-Pure-Master-Slave-tp3767086p3798603.html
>> Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>>
>
>
>
> --
> http://fusesource.com
> http://blog.garytully.com
