why would adding this: <property name="transacted" value="true"/>
to this: org.apache.activemq.camel.component.ActiveMQComponent cause the broker to stop working? There are no transacted routes. The faster the messages come in, the more disappear. I have a very simple config that is guaranteed to lose 99/100 messages if the broker is transacted. Is there anything special the client has to do? Surely not though, as there are no transacted routes. Alistair -- mov eax,1 mov ebx,0 int 80h On 2 Oct 2011, at 09:43, Alistair Young wrote: > eventually found the problem. > > if transactions are enabled nothing works. Only the first message gets > through the route, the rest disappear. The problems start by adding > transacted and transactionManager to the ActiveMQComponent as per: > > http://camel.apache.org/transactional-client.html > > so I'm not sure how to go about fixing it. Would you have any pointers please? > > <bean id="poolConnectionFactory" > class="org.apache.activemq.pool.PooledConnectionFactory"> > <property name="maxConnections" value="8"/> > <property name="connectionFactory" ref="jmsConnectionFactory"/> > </bean> > > <bean id="jmsConnectionFactory" > class="org.apache.activemq.ActiveMQConnectionFactory"> > <property name="brokerURL" value="vm://matrixBroker?create=false" /> > </bean> > > <bean id="jmsTransactionManager" > class="org.springframework.jms.connection.JmsTransactionManager"> > <property name="connectionFactory" ref="poolConnectionFactory"/> > </bean> > > <bean id="activemq" > class="org.apache.activemq.camel.component.ActiveMQComponent" > > <property name="connectionFactory" ref="poolConnectionFactory"/> > <property name="transacted" value="true"/> > <property name="transactionManager" ref="jmsTransactionManager"/> > </bean> > > thanks, > > Alistair > > -------------- > mov eax,1 > mov ebx,0 > int 80 > > On 30 Sep 2011, at 13:35, Alistair Young wrote: > >> thanks Tim, that would be very helpful of you. I was about to dive into the >> camel source to see why the route wouldn't accept anything but if you have >> time to do a small test project I would be very grateful. >> >> I'm running camel 2.8.1, activemq 5.5.0, spring 3.0.5 under tomcat. I've >> attached my pom.xml and camel-config.xml. mvn clean install then deploy to >> tomcat. >> >> many thanks, >> >> Alistair >> >> -- >> mov eax,1 >> mov ebx,0 >> int 80h >> <camel-config.xml> >> <pom.xml> >> >> >> On 30 Sep 2011, at 13:23, Tim wrote: >> >>> Alistair. I just tried the same with an embedded activemq instance and it >>> works great. >>> Maybe this has to do with broker settings? I can setup a tiny test project >>> for you if you want to try that? >>> >>> On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 11:27 AM, Alistair Young >>> <alistair.yo...@uhi.ac.uk>wrote: >>> >>>> I can now reproduce this every time. Sending 100 messages in very quick >>>> succession to a camel route. JMX: >>>> >>>> <route id="matrix" errorHandlerRef="matrixDeadLetterErrorHandler"> >>>> <from uri="activemq:topic:matrix"/> >>>> <to uri="activemq:topic:edirectory"/> >>>> </route> >>>> >>>> EnqueueCount = 100 >>>> DispatchCount = 100 >>>> InFlightCount = 100 >>>> DequeueCount = 1 >>>> >>>> only 1 message ever gets through the route. That's 99 percent message loss, >>>> every time. This happens on two servers with the same config. >>>> >>>> This happens with the producer on the same machine as the broker as well as >>>> a remote broker. >>>> >>>> Is there anything I should be looking at to see where the other 99 messages >>>> are? JMX says they're in flight but all dead letter queues are empty and >>>> there are no errors anywhere. >>>> >>>> Alistair >>>> >>>> -- >>>> mov eax,1 >>>> mov ebx,0 >>>> int 80h >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On 30 Sep 2011, at 09:12, Alistair Young wrote: >>>> >>>>> getting somewhere. >>>>> >>>>> <route id="matrix" errorHandlerRef="matrixDeadLetterErrorHandler"> >>>>> <from uri="activemq:topic:matrix"/> >>>>> <transacted /> >>>>> <process ref="matrixProcessor" /> >>>>> <to uri="activemq:topic:edirectory"/> >>>>> </route> >>>>> >>>>> - producer clock is 2mins ahead of broker clock, timestampplugin enabled >>>> on broker >>>>> - no delay between messages at the producer = 62 out of 100 get through >>>> the route, consistently >>>>> - 3sec delay at producer, around 88 - 97 get through. That's as good as >>>> it gets >>>>> - 5sec delay at producer, 93 made it through the route >>>>> - remove the route and send direct to topic in activemq, no delay, no >>>> message loss, consistently >>>>> >>>>> so the messages are being lost in the route. No matter what the delay in >>>> sending messages, some are always lost and vanish. There are no errors, >>>> nothing in any dead letter queue. They simply vanish. They don't even make >>>> it as far as the <process ref="matrixProcessor" />. >>>>> >>>>> sending from a ruby producer that blats them out far quicker than the >>>> java producer is even worse. Only 1 - 3 ever get through the route. >>>> Removing >>>> the route and sending to the activemq topic instead, all messages get >>>> through no matter how fast they come. >>>>> >>>>> Alistair >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> mov eax,1 >>>>> mov ebx,0 >>>>> int 80h >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On 29 Sep 2011, at 18:10, Alistair Young wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> no connection pool. What was disturbing was the first message sent to >>>> the broker after a restart and clean out of the data dir, disappeared. >>>> There's a similar route on the broker that works fine. The only difference >>>> is the producer for the wonky route is on windows and is up to 1min ahead >>>> of >>>> the broker's clock. Would have thought the timestamplugin would take care >>>> of >>>> that though. Can see it changing the timestamp in the logs. >>>>>> >>>>>> Alistair >>>>>> >>>>>> -------------- >>>>>> mov eax,1 >>>>>> mov ebx,0 >>>>>> int 80 >>>>>> >>>>>> On 29 Sep 2011, at 17:31, Tim wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> 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/ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >> >
