> BTW: I currenty own the required grants since oracle is running on my own laptop. But I know that this will cause trouble when installing Artemis in our production environment.
Probably it could be a latency issue too: there are several configuration properties <https://activemq.apache.org/artemis/docs/latest/persistence.html> that could be tuned to allow working with high latency connection (but it is not reccomended TBH): - *jdbc-lock-acquisition-timeout* The max allowed time in milliseconds while trying to acquire a JDBC lock. The default value is 60000 milliseconds (ie 60 seconds). - *jdbc-lock-renew-period* The period in milliseconds of the keep alive service of a JDBC lock. The default value is 2000 milliseconds (ie 2 seconds). - *jdbc-lock-expiration* The time in milliseconds a JDBC lock is considered valid without keeping it alive. The default value is 20000 milliseconds (ie 20 seconds). *jdbc-lock-acquisition-timeout *could be turned to -1 ie infinite and the others could be raised to appropiate values considering the DBMS latencies (eg I would say renew to 10 seconds and expiration to 60 seconds). > 3) no I haven't tried the latest master. But since I do not find a related issue in JIRA I assume that it still exist. Some time ago I've opened (and it is already merged on master) Make the JDBC Node Manager more resilient on failures <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ARTEMIS-1541> to address cases like this, hopefully it will solve it. > And I can see that the broker is holding a lock on that table. So it tries to insert something which fails but does not properly rollback... That's strange but not impossible: there is a rare case of a leaking and unkilleable Oracle driver thread called: oracle.jdbc.driver.BlockSource.ThreadedCachingBlockSource.BlockReleaser <https://support.oracle.com/knowledge/Middleware/2241504_1.html>. It could be the one actually locking that table. Cheers, Franz Il giorno ven 26 gen 2018 alle ore 14:44 Archibald <arch...@gmx.net> ha scritto: > And I can see that the broker is holding a lock on that table. So it tries > to > insert something which fails but does not properly rollback... > > > > -- > Sent from: > http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/ActiveMQ-User-f2341805.html >
