On Fri, Jan 3, 2014 at 1:18 PM, Muhammad Ichsan <ich...@gmail.com> wrote: > I'm using org.springframework.jms.connection.CachingConnectionFactory > instead of org.apache.activemq.pool.PooledConnectionFactory. Is that > problem? >
If you are using blueprint, then yeah you need to call its start|stop method also - the method names may be destroy / init or whatever, so you need to check that out. If you use spring xml file, then spring automatic should call its start|stop methods. But in blueprint this does not happen. > While using org.apache.activemq.pool.PooledConnectionFactory with > proper start and stop (init-method="start" destroy-method="stop"), I > have no problem. > > On Fri, Jan 3, 2014 at 6:32 PM, Claus Ibsen <claus.ib...@gmail.com> wrote: >> If you use a connection pool then make sure that this pool is also >> shutdown when you stop the bundle. >> >> eg usually that is to ensure the pool start|stop methods is invoked. >> >> See details at: >> http://camel.apache.org/activemq >> >> On Fri, Jan 3, 2014 at 12:07 PM, Muhammad Ichsan <ich...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> I have routes defined in an OSGi bundle. The routes use activemq >>> component to process data. To be exact, I have camel listen into 3 >>> different queue with concurrency = 10. >>> >>> As I started it in servicemix (apache-servicemix-4.4.0-fuse-00-27), I >>> see in the Active MQ Web console that the queues are consumed as >>> expected: >>> - queue.a = 10 concurrent consumers >>> - queue.b = 10 concurrent consumers >>> - queue.c = 10 concurrent consumers >>> >>> Without doing any transaction, I stop the bundle. But strangely I have >>> the following fact: >>> - queue.a = 10 concurrent consumers >>> - queue.b = 9 concurrent consumers >>> - queue.c = 1 concurrent consumers >>> >>> where I expect all of them to be 0 concurrent consumers. >>> >>> This is a big problem, since when I start the bundle back, it creates >>> more than 10 concurrent consumers for each queue. And my transaction >>> can not run properly, because the old consumers (which remains), >>> interfere the transaction messages. >>> >>> My question is, what's wrong here? Is a bug? Or I should do something >>> to make it as expected? >>> >>> FYI, this is my ActiveMQ log level = INFO on Servicemix: >>> http://pastebin.com/AcgQApDK >>> >>> Thanks >>> >>> -- >>> ~The best men are men who benefit to others >>> http://www.michsan.web.id 一緒に勉強しましょう！ >>> >>> Yang berkualitas memang beda rasanya! >>> http://rizqi-cookies.com >> >> >> >> -- >> Claus Ibsen >> ----------------- >> Red Hat, Inc. >> Email: cib...@redhat.com >> Twitter: davsclaus >> Blog: http://davsclaus.com >> Author of Camel in Action: http://www.manning.com/ibsen >> Make your Camel applications look hawt, try: http://hawt.io > > > > -- > ~The best men are men who benefit to others > http://www.michsan.web.id 一緒に勉強しましょう！ > > Yang berkualitas memang beda rasanya! > http://rizqi-cookies.com -- Claus Ibsen ----------------- Red Hat, Inc. Email: cib...@redhat.com Twitter: davsclaus Blog: http://davsclaus.com Author of Camel in Action: http://www.manning.com/ibsen Make your Camel applications look hawt, try: http://hawt.io
