>From a fix perspective, have a look at org.apache.activemq.broker.region.IndirectMessageReference
it seems to be what is needed but I don't think it is currently utilised to the full or fleshed out. On 24 February 2012 11:52, Gary Tully <gary.tu...@gmail.com> wrote: > That seems to be a reasonable expectation, that transaction size is > not limited to available memory. > There was some work on trunk to have an in-memory send transaction > overflow to a temp file but it looks > like the pending massages cursor is a limitation for the receive side. > > If you can produce with a simple junit test case and open an issue, it > would be a good start point for further investigation. > > Is the the behavior the same when u use the default store cursor? My > guess is that it is but just incase. > > On 24 February 2012 00:47, mserrano <mar...@attivio.com> wrote: >> version 5.5.1 >> broker cfg: memory: 256M, Store:10g, Swap/tmp:10g, persistence=true, >> producerFlowControl=true >> >> I'm using the http://activemq.apache.org/message-cursors.html >> fileQueueCursor destination policy for a queue. It appears to properly >> page in messages in the cursor without blocking when it gets to 70% memory >> use. The queue is being read by a transacted session consumer which is >> keeping open the transaction for a many messages (>10k). The messages >> themselves are large (800k or so). What I see is that the Queue >> pagedInMessages data structure will grow without bound and contains a >> reference to every message dispatched to the consumer. Eventually the >> broker will run out of memory. >> >> Producer flow control does not get triggered (but if it did my transaction >> would not be able to get all the messages it needs and would never >> complete). >> >> Is it just not possible to use ActiveMQ in this way? What I mean by this is >> that I'd like the total size of the number of messages * the size of the >> messages of an open transaction to be bounded by the disk store limits not >> by memory limits. Since the messages are persisted, it seems like this >> should be possible. >> >> Any suggestions for what I should do differently? Would the >> connection.setTransactedIndividualAck setting in 5.6 help here? >> >> I'm happy to work on fixes/tests for this but need some guidance. >> >> >> -- >> View this message in context: >> http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/out-of-memory-using-producer-flow-control-and-fileQueueCursor-tp4415752p4415752.html >> Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > > > > -- > http://fusesource.com > http://blog.garytully.com -- http://fusesource.com http://blog.garytully.com
