Is hdp132 the master or the slave? And what URI does your client use to connect?
Do you see that message once, or six times? On Apr 8, 2016 12:32 PM, "Natarajan, Rajeswari" <rajeswari.natara...@sap.com> wrote: > Thanks Tim for the detailed email. When I do failover I see below > exception in our app logs. > > org.apache.activemq.transport.failover.FailoverTransport > Transport (tcp://hdp132.lab1.ariba.com:61616) failed, attempting to > automatically reconnect java.io.EOFException: null > at java.io.DataInputStream.readInt(DataInputStream.java:392) > at > org.apache.activemq.openwire.OpenWireFormat.unmarshal(OpenWireFormat.java:267) > at > org.apache.activemq.transport.tcp.TcpTransport.readCommand(TcpTransport.java:240) > at > org.apache.activemq.transport.tcp.TcpTransport.doRun(TcpTransport.java:232) > at > org.apache.activemq.transport.tcp.TcpTransport.run(TcpTransport.java:215) > > The message redelivery attempt is default in the activemq conf, so it is > 6 times. > > > I just send 1 message to the queue ,receive it and don't ack it ,then do > failover . There is a thread which listens for receiving messages in the > queue ,I don't see any exception in there . So not sure from where the > transport exception is thrown. > In the produce send , receive and ack code the JMS > Is there a way to track failover happened. May be some sort of listener > ,then the session can be recovered. > > Regards, > Rajeswari > > -----Original Message----- > From: tbai...@gmail.com [mailto:tbai...@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Tim Bain > Sent: Thursday, April 07, 2016 8:53 PM > To: ActiveMQ Users <users@activemq.apache.org> > Subject: Re: MasterSlave config ActiveMQ > > I apologize, I misunderstood what you meant by "I made sure the messages > will not be acknowledged." > > When either the broker or a consumer goes down while a consumer is actively > consuming a message, the broker will consider that a filed delivery and try > to redeliver the message. The maximumRedeliveries property of the > Redelivery Policy (http://activemq.apache.org/redelivery-policy.html) > controls how many times the message will be redelivered before being put > into the DLQ. The default value is 6; is this the value you're using, or > have you explicitly set a different value? With the default value of 6, > your consumer should fail over to the new master, the message should be > redelivered (because this is redelivery attempt #1 and that's less than 6), > and your consumer should start processing the message for the second time. > As long as that doesn't throw any exceptions or fail in any other way (have > you confirmed this?), the second redelivery attempt should eventually > result in a successful processing of the message. > > However, it sounds like that's not happening for you, and > > http://stackoverflow.com/questions/8576821/cant-get-activemq-to-resend-my-messages#comment35122357_8576821 > seems to indicate that when using INDIVIDUAL_ACKNOWLEDGE mode, if you don't > close the Connection or recover() the Session, the messages will be > considered duplicates and ignored by the consumer. I haven't worked with > INDIVIDUAL_ACKNOWLEDGE mode myself; can anyone else on the list shed more > light on whether that comment is accurate? > > If so, it would sound like clients who use INDIVIDUAL_ACKNOWLEDGE mode > shouldn't use the failover transport, because they need the connection to > die so they can recreate it. If that were true, I'd expect we'd have a > warning somewhere on the wiki saying that those two features aren't > compatible with one another, but I haven't seen one in my searching this > evening... > > Tim > > On Thu, Apr 7, 2016 at 12:02 PM, Natarajan, Rajeswari < > rajeswari.natara...@sap.com> wrote: > > > I am trying to understand, sorry if I sound , I don't believe you or > > skeptic. I have an application with the broker url defined as below > (with > > shared file system) > > > > failover:(tcp://<hostname1>:61616,tcp://<hostname2>:61616. > > > > When I failover I see the web console and see one consumer on the fail > > over host ,as the application is having a consumer and got a message ,but > > did not acknowledge (delaying it on purpose for a use case) during > > failover.. In our use case, there will be messagse sent to the queue and > we > > do some processing ,but not acknowledging the messages ,unless we get a > > condition satisfied ,which might take some time. So when a failover > happens > > within that time ,all such messages will be moved to DLQ? > > Is there any way to have them in the same state as before in the fail > > over host. > > > > Thank you, > > Rajeswari > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: tbai...@gmail.com [mailto:tbai...@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Tim Bain > > Sent: Thursday, April 07, 2016 5:41 AM > > To: ActiveMQ Users <users@activemq.apache.org> > > Subject: RE: MasterSlave config ActiveMQ > > > > Quoting from what I originally wrote you: "or if there's a consumer > > on the failover host that tries and fails to consume them." Consuming a > > message but not acking it == failing to consume it. The failover > > functionality works, despite your apparent skepticism; retry your test > with > > no consumers if you don't believe me. > > > > Tim > > On Apr 7, 2016 5:22 AM, "Natarajan, Rajeswari" < > > rajeswari.natara...@sap.com> > > wrote: > > > > > FYI using non-transactional session with > > > ActiveMQSession.INDIVIDUAL_ACKNOWLEDGE > > > > > > Rajeswari > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Natarajan, Rajeswari [mailto:rajeswari.natara...@sap.com] > > > Sent: Thursday, April 07, 2016 3:57 AM > > > To: users@activemq.apache.org > > > Subject: RE: MasterSlave config ActiveMQ > > > > > > Thank you. But in my case I am sure the messages have not reached > > > JMSExpiration date. > > > > > > I assume there will be a consumer on the failover host ,once the > failover > > > happens. But when I tested, I made sure the messages will not be > > > acknowledged . Still I see consistently the pending/enqueued messages > go > > > DLQ upon failover and don't appear in the original Queue as enqueued. > > > Am I missing something > > > > > > Rajeswari > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: tbai...@gmail.com [mailto:tbai...@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Tim > Bain > > > Sent: Wednesday, April 06, 2016 10:26 PM > > > To: ActiveMQ Users <users@activemq.apache.org> > > > Subject: Re: MasterSlave config ActiveMQ > > > > > > Only if they had reached their JMSExpiration date, or if there's a > > consumer > > > on the failover host that tries and fails to consume them. Otherwise, > > they > > > will continue to be available on the queue. > > > > > > On Wed, Apr 6, 2016 at 5:03 PM, Natarajan, Rajeswari < > > > rajeswari.natara...@sap.com> wrote: > > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > I am testing activemq master slave config using shared file system. > > > > > > > > 1) I issued 1 message to a queue and I saw that in both pending > message > > > > count and enqueued count. The message was not dequeued. > > > > > > > > 2)Killed the master ,the secondary took over ,in secondary's > > webconsole I > > > > see that > > > > > > > > Messages dequeued as 1 > > > > > > > > And in the ActiveMQ.DLQ I see 1 pending message and 1 enqueued > > message. > > > > > > > > > > > > So in case of failover ,the pending/unacknowledged messages go to DLQ > > and > > > > never get processed ? > > > > > > > > > > > > Thank you, > > > > Rajeswari > > > > > > > > > >
