Well with only 17 you definitely aren't hitting any prefetch limits or
anything like that.
Are you using a connection pool?
On Thu, Sep 29, 2011 at 5:05 PM, Alistair Young <alistair.yo...@uhi.ac.uk>wrote:
> I think this way madness lies.
>
> 17 sent to topicA, dispatchCount = 15, dequeueCount = 12
> topicB enqueueCount = 12
>
> so 17 came in, 12 made it through, of the 5 that went missing it claims to
> have sent 3 to topicB but they never arrived and the last 2 just simply
> vanished completely.
>
> What on earth?
>
> Alistair
>
> --------------
> mov eax,1
> mov ebx,0
> int 80
>
> On 29 Sep 2011, at 15:41, Alistair Young wrote:
>
> > nup - cleaned out the data dir and restarted the broker. First message in
> vanished. Wasn't persisted. So something is fundamentally broken.
> >
> > topicA inflightCount = dispatchCount = enqueueCount = 1
> > topicB is completely empty
> >
> > so the message wasn't persisted, wasn't processed, wasn't routed and just
> vanished from the broker.
> >
> > Alistair
> >
> > --------------
> > mov eax,1
> > mov ebx,0
> > int 80
> >
> > On 29 Sep 2011, at 15:13, Alistair Young wrote:
> >
> >> route goes from topicA -> topicB, transacted.
> >> topicA inflightCount = 96 and increases on each batch of incoming
> messages
> >> topicB dispatchCount = enqueueCount
> >>
> >> wondering if the missing messages are connected to topicA inflightCount.
> I noticed there are two consumers for topicB. The main consumer gets its
> messages fine. Wonder if the second consumer is a durable topic consumer and
> therefore activemq is persisting its messages but it hasn't connected in a
> very long time. Would that cause the topic to get too big? i.e. messages go
> into the topic until the limit is reached. Main consumer pulls messages off
> and messages are able to go onto topicB again. Before consumer pulls and
> after limit reached, messages can't get from topicA -> topicB, hence the
> topicA inflightCount not zero?
> >>
> >> Alistair
> >>
> >> --------------
> >> mov eax,1
> >> mov ebx,0
> >> int 80
> >>
> >> On 29 Sep 2011, at 12:17, Tim wrote:
> >>
> >>> Sorry you might have tried this since I haven't been following this
> thread.
> >>> But can you check your jmx console.
> >>> In particular check 2 things.. the route to see if the number of
> exchanges
> >>> match what you think and how if any exchanges failed.
> >>> Also check the JMX console on activemq for the queue or topic in
> question
> >>> and see how many were enqueued vs dispatched.
> >>> Check your deadletter queue from there too
> >>>
> >>> On Thu, Sep 29, 2011 at 12:52 PM, Alistair Young
> >>> <alistair.yo...@uhi.ac.uk>wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> dunno - nothing works. Random messages are just vanishing once they
> reach
> >>>> the broker. No trace, no logs, no dead letter queue. Just vanishing.
> I've
> >>>> removed <transacted /> and <process> but it doesn't help. The producer
> is a
> >>>> few secs behind the broker:
> >>>>
> >>>> sent : 11:25:26
> >>>> arrived : 11:24:57
> >>>> timstamp on message : 1317291897071 = 29 Sep 2011 10:24:57 GMT,
> presumably
> >>>> the timestampplugin doing this
> >>>> message vanishes
> >>>>
> >>>> but all messages display this clock behaviour and not all vanish.
> >>>>
> >>>> Alistair
> >>>>
> >>>> --------------
> >>>> mov eax,1
> >>>> mov ebx,0
> >>>> int 80
> >>>>
> >>>> On 29 Sep 2011, at 10:24, Alistair Young wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> just saw your info about transacted being before from - will change
> that
> >>>> and monitor again.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> thanks,
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Alistair
> >>>>>
> >>>>> --------------
> >>>>> mov eax,1
> >>>>> mov ebx,0
> >>>>> int 80
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On 29 Sep 2011, at 10:18, Alistair Young wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> just noticed a batch of identical 5 messages, three were missing and
> >>>> another single message vanished. tracer logged nothing. No errors,
> dead
> >>>> letter queue empty.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> One thing that happens is another machine polls the stats topic in
> >>>> activemq every 2mins. Would that cause a problem? It asks for stats on
> the
> >>>> matrix topic, which is part of the transacted route.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> 29 September 2011 10:05:07 - Adding destination :
> >>>> Topic:ActiveMQ.Advisory.Connection
> >>>>>> 29 September 2011 10:05:07 - Creating new transaction with name
> [null]:
> >>>> PROPAGATION_REQUIRED,ISOLATION_DEFAULT
> >>>>>> 29 September 2011 10:05:07 - Stopping connection:
> >>>> vm://matrixBroker#285916
> >>>>>> 29 September 2011 10:05:07 - Stopped transport:
> vm://matrixBroker#285916
> >>>>>> 29 September 2011 10:05:07 - Connection Stopped:
> >>>> vm://matrixBroker#285916
> >>>>>> 29 September 2011 10:05:07 - Setting up new connection id:
> >>>> ID:prodprovisioning-matrix-41707-1317215126074-4:142961, address:
> >>>> vm://matrixBroker#285920
> >>>>>> 29 September 2011 10:05:07 - Adding Connection : ConnectionInfo
> >>>> {commandId = 1, responseRequired = true, connectionId =
> >>>> ID:prodprovisioning-matrix-41707-1317215126074-4:142961, clientId =
> >>>> ID:prodprovisioning-matrix-41707-1317215126074-5:142961, userName =
> null,
> >>>> password = *****, brokerPath = null, brokerMasterConnector = false,
> >>>> manageable = true, clientMaster = true, faultTolerant = false}
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Alistair
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> --------------
> >>>>>> mov eax,1
> >>>>>> mov ebx,0
> >>>>>> int 80
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> On 29 Sep 2011, at 09:36, Alistair Young wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> <transacted/> Should be after <from>
> >>>>>>> it is after from - do you mean it should be before?
> >>>>>>> <route id="eDirSuccessBroadcast">
> >>>>>>> <from uri="activemq:topic:edirectoryprocessed"/>
> >>>>>>> <transacted />
> >>>>>>> <process ref="groupwiseProcessor" />
> >>>>>>> <to uri="activemq:topic:blackboard"/>
> >>>>>>> </route>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> thanks for the dead letter tips, will apply them.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Alistair
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> --------------
> >>>>>>> mov eax,1
> >>>>>>> mov ebx,0
> >>>>>>> int 80
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> On 29 Sep 2011, at 09:20, Claus Ibsen wrote:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Hi
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> <transacted/> Should be after <from>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> On Thu, Sep 29, 2011 at 10:09 AM, Alistair Young
> >>>>>>>> <alistair.yo...@uhi.ac.uk> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>> Do you use message expiry?
> >>>>>>>>> no
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> timestamp plugin
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> using that
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> activemq 5.5.0
> >>>>>>>>> camel 2.8.0
> >>>>>>>>> spring 3.0.5
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> noticed sl4j errors on startup, fixed that and now the tracer is
> >>>> logging so hopefully I can see any errors.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> <route id="matrix"
> errorHandlerRef="matrixDeadLetterErrorHandler">
> >>>>>>>>> <from uri="activemq:topic:matrix"/>
> >>>>>>>>> <process ref="matrixProcessor" />
> >>>>>>>>> <transacted />
> >>>>>>>>> <to uri="activemq:topic:edirectory"/>
> >>>>>>>>> </route>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> <bean id="jmsConnectionFactory"
> >>>> class="org.apache.activemq.ActiveMQConnectionFactory"
> >>>> depends-on="matrixBrokerID">
> >>>>>>>>> <property name="brokerURL"
> >>>> value="vm://matrixBroker?create=false"/>
> >>>>>>>>> </bean>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> <bean id="jmsTransactionManager"
> >>>> class="org.springframework.jms.connection.JmsTransactionManager">
> >>>>>>>>> <property name="connectionFactory"
> >>>> ref="jmsConnectionFactory"/>
> >>>>>>>>> </bean>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> <bean id="activemq"
> >>>> class="org.apache.activemq.camel.component.ActiveMQComponent">
> >>>>>>>>> <property name="connectionFactory"
> >>>> ref="jmsConnectionFactory"/>
> >>>>>>>>> <property name="transacted" value="true"/>
> >>>>>>>>> <property name="transactionManager"
> >>>> ref="jmsTransactionManager"/>
> >>>>>>>>> </bean>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> <bean id="matrixDeadLetterErrorHandler"
> >>>> class="org.apache.camel.builder.DeadLetterChannelBuilder">
> >>>>>>>>> <property name="deadLetterUri" value="jms:queue:dead"/>
> >>>>>>>>> <property name="redeliveryPolicy"
> >>>> ref="matrixRedeliveryPolicyConfig"/>
> >>>>>>>>> </bean>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> <bean id="matrixRedeliveryPolicyConfig"
> >>>> class="org.apache.camel.processor.RedeliveryPolicy">
> >>>>>>>>> <property name="maximumRedeliveries" value="10"/>
> >>>>>>>>> <property name="redeliveryDelay" value="250"/>
> >>>>>>>>> </bean>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> thanks,
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Alistair
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> --------------
> >>>>>>>>> mov eax,1
> >>>>>>>>> mov ebx,0
> >>>>>>>>> int 80
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> On 29 Sep 2011, at 08:53, Claus Ibsen wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> Hi
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> Do you use message expiry?
> >>>>>>>>>> Make sure clocks between server/clients is synced as much as
> >>>> possible.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> There is a timestamp plugin
> >>>>>>>>>> http://activemq.apache.org/timestampplugin.html
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> And do you use queue or topic.
> >>>>>>>>>> What version of AMQ and Camel are you using?
> >>>>>>>>>> And how have you configured the AMQ broker, and the Camel
> context?
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Sep 29, 2011 at 7:21 AM, Taariq Levack <
> taar...@gmail.com>
> >>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>> Hi
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> Where the logs go, if it's logged at all, still depends on your
> >>>> logger and
> >>>>>>>>>>> how you configured it.
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> Here are links to how to enable logging[1] and camel logging
> FAQ[2]
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> [1]http://camel.apache.org/how-do-i-enable-debug-logging.html
> >>>>>>>>>>> [2]http://camel.apache.org/logging-questions.html
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> Taariq
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Sep 28, 2011 at 1:23 PM, Alistair Young <
> >>>> alistair.yo...@uhi.ac.uk>wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> which is the best trace method to use? trace="true", or
> >>>> camelTracer and
> >>>>>>>>>>>> traceFormatter beans? and where does the log end up? I've
> tried
> >>>> them all but
> >>>>>>>>>>>> no log appears.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Alistair
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> --
> >>>>>>>>>>>> mov eax,1
> >>>>>>>>>>>> mov ebx,0
> >>>>>>>>>>>> int 80h
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> On 28 Sep 2011, at 12:08, Marco Westermann wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi,
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> I suggest enable tracing to see exactly what happens in your
> >>>> route.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> regards, Marco
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Am 28.09.2011 13:01, schrieb Alistair Young:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> I now have a dead letter channel which is empty after losing
> 9
> >>>> out of 10
> >>>>>>>>>>>> messages. I also added a logging handler which logged nothing.
> >>>> Verified the
> >>>>>>>>>>>> messages arrived at the broker, then they just vanished.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Alistair
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> --
> >>>>>>>>>> Claus Ibsen
> >>>>>>>>>> -----------------
> >>>>>>>>>> FuseSource
> >>>>>>>>>> Email: cib...@fusesource.com
> >>>>>>>>>> Web: http://fusesource.com
> >>>>>>>>>> Twitter: davsclaus, fusenews
> >>>>>>>>>> Blog: http://davsclaus.blogspot.com/
> >>>>>>>>>> Author of Camel in Action: http://www.manning.com/ibsen/
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> --
> >>>>>>>> Claus Ibsen
> >>>>>>>> -----------------
> >>>>>>>> FuseSource
> >>>>>>>> Email: cib...@fusesource.com
> >>>>>>>> Web: http://fusesource.com
> >>>>>>>> Twitter: davsclaus, fusenews
> >>>>>>>> Blog: http://davsclaus.blogspot.com/
> >>>>>>>> Author of Camel in Action: http://www.manning.com/ibsen/
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>
> >
>
>
