for the given networkTTL ?
Will the consumer_broker receive as many messages as the number of
paths ?
(I hope not). Could you please elaborate on the details of message
routing
in this case ?
Thanks!
Regards
- Sridhar
On 2/19/06, Rob Davies [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Networks are being updated
the slave broker to the master.
3. re-start master then slave brokers.
cheers,
Rob
On 22 Mar 2006, at 12:07, Javier Leyba wrote:
On 3/22/06, Rob Davies [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
When you say you restarted the master - was the slave still running
and which broker was the listener attached
to be compliant with the JMS specification, ActiveMQ uses UTC (though
I still call it GMT)
cheers,
Rob
On 29 Mar 2006, at 21:39, Kim Pepper wrote:
Also, how does it work with servers in different timezones? Can you
specify
to use UTC?
--
View this message in context:
useAsync = false is the default in activemq- are you sending to
Queues/Topics ? If Topics - do you have durable consumers ?
cheers,
Rob
On 6 Apr 2006, at 14:26, Jim Ronan wrote:
I've downloaded activemq-4.0-RC2 as you suggested, and the problems
have gone
away.
However, if I kill the
I'd recommend that you look at: http://www.activemq.org/JMS+Streams
cheers,
Rob
On 13 Apr 2006, at 12:47, kj1003 wrote:
Hi,
We are using ActiveMQ to transfer files by converting them into
byte arrays
and sending an object message. Is there a better way of doing a file
transfer? How
We've fixed some memory leaks in the RC3 release (which is still in
the process of being voted) - which will hopefully fix this issue.
cheers,
Rob
On 14 Apr 2006, at 11:35, Dmitriy Fot wrote:
Hi,
I tried persistent=true, and persistent=false too.
I also tried different acknowledgement
Richard,
before RC2 the failover tag was automatically injected for networks -
but IIRC that was changed to be consistent with the way URIs work for
other connectors and protocols.
For your network URI could you try:
static:failover:(tcp://127.0.0.1:61616,tcp://127.0.0.1:61626)
cheers,
There was a timing issue in master-slave that caused these errors -
this has been fixed RC3.
cheers,
Rob
On 19 Apr 2006, at 19:04, Kevro wrote:
Here is the other message I found:
http://www.nabble.com/Slavefailed-with-Invalid-acknowledgment-
t1368729.html
(I'm not using a
Networks have a time to live property - networkTTL = which by default
is 1 - ie. messages only go one hop. Just increment this number to
the number of hops you want the message to go through
cheers,
Rob
On 21 Apr 2006, at 10:09, Matthew Xie wrote:
Thanks James and sorry to my poor
please send it to my email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
cheers,
Rob
On 23 Apr 2006, at 23:18, rtselvan wrote:
Rob,
Yes, I am not batching the messages, my MDB only process one
message at a
time.
I generated the DEBUG log file, How do I send it to you? It seems
nabble
only accepts the IMAGE
with the snapshot version. But what would I
loose if I set useAsyncSend = true? I think I get no exception if
a message cannot be delivered, right?
Cheers,
Reza
Rob Davies [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi Reza,
this is good feedback - something that has changed between activemq
3.x and 4.0
Can you elaborate ? What are the symptoms of the memory leak in RC3 ?
On 26 Apr 2006, at 14:45, amerigo5 wrote:
Refer to this post for more info about RC3:
http://www.nabble.com/-VOTE-ActiveMQ-4.0-RC3-t1431912.html
But even RC3 have memory leak issue :(
--
View this message in context:
An option would be to listen for transport failures in the
remoteBroker transport and stop (and unwind) the local broker
transport on failure - and only re-connect when the remote broker
transport is re-established. transportInterupted and transportResumed
was added to the
On 1 May 2006, at 11:22, reza aliakbary wrote:
Hello,
Suppose this scenario: I have 10 queues in my application and I
want to consume their messages asynchronously. I want to know whether
1- it can slow down the server if I add alot of consumers to
this queues (event if they are
looking at the src I don't think your using the latest snaphot -
what's the date your using ?
You can get the latest and greatest here: http://cvs.apache.org/
repository/incubator-activemq/distributions/
cheers,
Rob
http://rajdavies.blogspot.com/
On 1 May 2006, at 13:43, Jamie McCrindle
interesting idea! - please raise a jira issue and we'll look at
getting a advisory in the next release
cheers,
Rob Davies
http://rajdavies.blogspot.com/
On 4 May 2006, at 21:14, greenbean wrote:
What is the best way to get notified when a change occurs on a
queue. I
would like to know
is not throwing an exception?
--
James
---
http://radio.weblogs.com/0112098/
Rob Davies
http://rajdavies.blogspot.com/
There aren't any issues doing this - no state is associated with a
session until the message is published
cheers,
Rob
Rob Davies
http://rajdavies.blogspot.com/
On May 15, 2006, at 4:23 PM, John Russell wrote:
Does anyone know if there are problems with creating a message with
one
between two brokers.
cheers,
Rob
Rob Davies
http://rajdavies.blogspot.com/
On 16 May 2006, at 16:45, hbruch wrote:
Hi,
I've got some questions regarding DemandForwardingBridge.
The DemandForwardingBridge only dispatches messages to remote
brokers, if
there is any consumer registered
This works for me with activemq 4.0.1. If you run jconsole on the
same box as the activemq broker - you should see the activemq broker
advertised as a local agent in the connect tab for jconsole - is this
not the case ?
On 23 Jun 2006, at 05:54, Bob Kendall wrote:
Java 1.5 (build
Are you saying there's no messages persisted between shutdown and re-
starting?
Topic messages are persisted only if there has been interest from a
durable topic subscriber - which you can setup from the JMX Console
or by ensuring that the durable consumers have started (it doesn't
have to
BTW - setting the destination directly on the message doesn't do
anything
and could you try an ping the host name your trying to connect to ? -
looks like you don't have a host called remotehost on your network :)
On 27 Jun 2006, at 10:45, kirkal wrote:
hi
thanks for the reply
i
configurable :)
cheers,
Rob Davies
http://rajdavies.blogspot.com/
On 11 Jul 2006, at 12:03, Eugene Prokopiev wrote:
Hi,
I use Kaha Persistence with this configuration:
beans xmlns=http://activemq.org/config/1.0;
broker useJmx=true persistent=false
populateJMSXUserID=true
will give it a go a see if it breaks anything - thanks for the patch!
cheers,
Rob
Rob Davies
http://rajdavies.blogspot.com/
On 1 Aug 2006, at 17:31, agrabil wrote:
Hello,
I believe that I have identified the issue with this particular
problem. It
appears that the code
could you enable debug logging on the client that fails to fall over
to the slave when the master dies ?
cheers,
Rob
Rob Davies
http://rajdavies.blogspot.com/
On 9 Aug 2006, at 22:26, cmose wrote:
I'm trying to fiddle around with the master slave configuration in
4.01 using
a few
this is most odd - but it looks like its all related - could you try
the latest snapshot from here:
http://people.apache.org/maven-snapshot-repository/org/apache/
activemq/apache-activemq/
cheers,
Rob
Rob Davies
http://rajdavies.blogspot.com/
On 9 Aug 2006, at 23:53, cmose wrote
Ah - ok - I'll make sure its backward compatible then :)
cheers,
Rob
On 15 Aug 2006, at 12:19, Mark Ashworth wrote:
Good Day,
I am using the Kaha Persistence and backward compatibility is a
problem.
Regards,
Mark P Ashworth
-Original Message-
From: Rob Davies [mailto:[EMAIL
which version of ActiveMQ are you using? This restriction was
recently removed - perhaps you can try a snapshot release ?
e.g. http://people.apache.org/maven-snapshot-repository/org/apache/
activemq/apache-activemq/
On 30 Aug 2006, at 07:29, eklas wrote:
Hi
Why is the ActiveMQ MapMessage
couple of things - don't use the journal and don't set the
randomize=false option on the failover transport - see: http://
www.activemq.org/site/jdbc-master-slave.html
cheers,
Rob
Rob Davies
http://rajdavies.blogspot.com/
On 31 Aug 2006, at 18:58, chanaka wrote:
AMQ Version: 4.1
ipv6 support has been transparent to Java since version 1.4 JRE - so
no change is necessary for either the broker or the Java clients. Not
sure about other language clients though
On 1 Sep 2006, at 16:51, cbq wrote:
activeMQ now support ipv6?
--
View this message in context:
For clarity -
1. which version of ActiveMQ are you using ?
2. Is this all running on your local box ?
3. If not - and you have one or most brokers running on your message
center - does your network permit multicast ? - and if so is your
machine and the data center all on the same lan ?
Hi Thiago,
there only seems to be one broker config file - for broker -
brokerDELL07.
Could you send the other one too please ?
cheers,
Rob
On 2 Sep 2006, at 00:29, dooart wrote:
Oops... I forgot to attach the configuration files:
Hi Naaman,
persistent messages sent to durable subscribers are always stored to
a persistent store. However, references to the stored messages are
held in memory - so it can be possible if a large number of messages
are sent to a non-active durable subscriber for the broker to stop
for the paging
support in ActiveMQ? The AMQ-845 doesn't provide any specifics.
-Original Message-
From: Rob Davies [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, September 05, 2006 10:22 AM
To: activemq-users@geronimo.apache.org
Subject: Re: Paging support
A message reference is kept in memory (which
in the
PrefetchSubscription/DurableTopicSubscriber etc. code, for timing
issues, transactions etc - I'm tempted not to loose that if possible :)
-Original Message-
From: Rob Davies [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, September 05, 2006 11:28 AM
To: activemq-users@geronimo.apache.org
On 5 Sep 2006, at 21:18, Fateev, Maxim wrote:
Messages are always put into storage - but they are additionally
pushed to subscribers for dispatching. I was going to implement a
mixed approach - where consumers that can keep up with the
producer will not be impeded by waiting for a poll,
Hi Manuel,
this looks like a good catch! Would mind opening a jira on this -
just so it's easier to track - I'll look at this as soon as I can
cheers,
Rob
On 27 Sep 2006, at 14:48, Manuel Teira wrote:
Hello.
Looking at the code in DestinationBridge
(org.apache.activemq.network.jms), I
with those messages? Any idea about what classes
to check?
Regards.
Manuel Teira escribió:
Rob Davies escribió:
Hi Manuel,
this looks like a good catch! Would mind opening a jira on this -
just so it's easier to track - I'll look at this as soon as I can
cheers,
Thanks. Rob. I've been
A heads up for folks using Kaha store - I've found an issue with the
way the store initialized named containers (unfortunately the Kaha
Persistence Adaptor does this). The fix requires that the root for
the container is written correctly to the named container's
IndexManager - and not the
keeping messages in memory pending dispatch will be optional for the
4.1 GA version of activemq
cheers,
Rob
On 10 Oct 2006, at 13:22, terrytriple wrote:
Afraid I can't help with your question, but I'm looking for an
answer to the
same question !
We are thinking of moving from a
Hi Jamie,
could you share some details about the type of messaging you were
using, and which database you were using to achieve the speed
improvement ?
cheers,
Rob
On 11 Oct 2006, at 11:58, Jamie McCrindle wrote:
hi,
just thought i'd mention, i switched from a journaledJDBC backed by a
Hi Rob,
the best place to start is to enable DEBUG logging in the brokers
log4j.properties file - which can be found in the conf/ directory of
the download.
I'd recommend actually just adding the line
log4j.logger.org.apache.activemq.transport=DEBUG - so you don't get
too much
Hi Chris,
thanks for the info. Please bear with it - I'm not sure the issue is
so much with Stomp but with ActiveMQ's ability to handle large
volumes of messages that haven't been consumed. This is something I'
ve been working on improving for a while - and it should be ready end
of
To create a generic publisher - you should create it with a null
destination (this is a JMS spec thing)
e.g.
TopicPublisher publisher = session.createPublisher(null);
publisher.publish(topic,msg);
cheers,
Rob
On 14 Oct 2006, at 13:02, Andy Czerwonka wrote:
Should I be creating a new
could you run the test again - and get a stack trace of the hang
please ?
cheers,
Rob
On 18 Oct 2006, at 11:03, ojs wrote:
Hello,
I have a really simple test scenario - I send 100 strings to the
queue and
the consumer just increses an internal counter when consuming the
messages.
When
been able to reproduce this - I'll let you know when it's fixed
On 18 Oct 2006, at 11:03, ojs wrote:
Hello,
I have a really simple test scenario - I send 100 strings to the
queue and
the consumer just increses an internal counter when consuming the
messages.
When using journaledJDBC for
This is now fixed in SVN head
On 18 Oct 2006, at 11:03, ojs wrote:
Hello,
I have a really simple test scenario - I send 100 strings to the
queue and
the consumer just increses an internal counter when consuming the
messages.
When using journaledJDBC for persistence I can run this test
have you removed the kaha database before this run ?
On 19 Oct 2006, at 09:29, ojs wrote:
rajdavies wrote:
This is now fixed in SVN head
I still have the same problem with this version. Just the log
output changed
a bit:
First run ends with:
[Thread-2] DEBUG
could you attach your test case ?
cheers,
Rob
On 19 Oct 2006, at 10:10, ojs wrote:
rajdavies wrote:
have you removed the kaha database before this run ?
Yes, I removed the database directory before the first run.
--
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/ActiveMQ-4.1-
Hi Charles,
thank you for pointing this out! We will look at updating the news
for the site from now on!
cheers,
rob
On 17 Nov 2006, at 08:18, Charles Anthony wrote:
Hi,
I remembered seeing on the list that a 4.02 had just been released,
and
so I went to http://www.activemq.org
You only hit this if you are using durable cursors for durable
subscribers - with the default JDBC database. Now this is
functionality that is due for official release in 4.2 (though it does
exist in 4.0.2) - and not documented any where - so the discussion is
probably better on the dev
ooh blimey!
This should work - there are junit test cases but a gremlin could
have worked its way in somewhere.
You don't happen to have any more of the log do you ?
cheers,
Rob
On 4 Dec 2006, at 07:33, Marlon Santos wrote:
Hi all,
I'm trying to use a Pure Master Slave connectivity in
oops! my bad -thanks for fixing
cheers,
Rob
On 12 Dec 2006, at 22:49, Guillaume Nodet wrote:
Thanks ! I have fixed that.
I was having problems too but had not had time to investigate the
problem...
On 12/12/06, Jerome Banks [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Folks,
I think there's a bug in line
As you're using the vm://transport - you could set the async flag =
true - which will cure this problem - e.g. your connection url would
be vm://localhost?async=true
cheers,
Rob
On 15 Dec 2006, at 16:41, drvillo wrote:
Hi there
I have spent the whole day now tracking down this, and I
This is not true - networks of brokers have been working very
successfully, and been deployed in production very successfully with
a number of users.
This may come as a shock to you, but even though Apache ActiveMQ is
open source and free to use, it doesn't mean that the developers of
This doesn't look right.
I would recommend:
Server1:
master1 - connector points to server2 master and server2 slave
slave1 - connectors point to server 2 master and server2 slave
i.e. don't have a network connector to the local slave
Rob Davies
http://rajdavies.blogspot.com/
On 21 Dec
If isCompressed() returns false then it looks like compression isn't
being set properly
On 21 Dec 2006, at 13:48, fancellu wrote:
Are you saying that compression IS working, it just doesn't look
like it?
How do I detect that compression was used then?
isCompressed() always returns
I've created a jira issue for this: http://issues.apache.org/
activemq/browse/AMQ-1108
cheers,
Rob
On 23 Dec 2006, at 10:44, drvillo wrote:
Found one Java-level deadlock:
=
ActiveMQ Task:
waiting to lock monitor 0x080e4f3c (object 0x92b60db0, a
Hi Francesco,
http://issues.apache.org/activemq/browse/AMQ-1108 is now fixed in SVN
trunk
cheers,
Rob
On 23 Dec 2006, at 18:41, drvillo wrote:
If it can help, it happens when a consumer start sending a pretty
high volume of messages (~100k) back into the beginning of a
pipelined system,
yes - this is the same API - as derived from the java docs
On 28 Dec 2006, at 09:37, Sagi Mann wrote:
Hi,
I've noticed that ActiveMQ comes with:
geronimo-jms_1.1_spec-1.0.jar
Is this the same JMS API from sun's website?
The site is: http://java.sun.com/products/jms/docs.html
thanks.
--
View
could you raise an issue - with test case here please: http://
issues.apache.org/activemq/secure/CreateIssue!default.jspa
and fill in as much info as you can (version, operating system etc)
cheers,
Rob
On 29 Dec 2006, at 12:04, mladzo wrote:
While starting my Spring application i'm getting
Definitely the best approach would be to use the message spooling -
which is available in 4.2 (though I'm hoping that the 4.2 release
will in fact be renamed the 5.0 release).
There should be some milestone releases for 4.2 available in the next
couple of weeks
cheers,
Rob
On 29 Dec 2006,
Hi Francesco,
spooling is in these releases and will be usable
cheers,
Rob
On 29 Dec 2006, at 13:58, drvillo wrote:
Hi Rob
since this path is pretty critical to my schedule do you maybe know
if message spooling will be in these releases, and if it will be meant
to be usable?
BTW: will they
In 4.0.2 the index for messages was held in memory in Kaha - this is
not the case in later releases - please try http://www.activemq.org/
site/activemq-410-release.html
cheers,
Rob
On 29 Dec 2006, at 16:06, Danielius Jurna wrote:
Hi.
Currently I'm evaluating kaha persistance and I have
That applies to the application thread only - it's valid to call
message.acknowlede() from a message listener (for a session using
client based acknowledgement)
cheers,
Rob
On 1 Jan 2007, at 11:39, Sagi Mann wrote:
Hi all,
The JMS specs say that a session can only be used inside a single
On 1 Jan 2007, at 14:23, Sagi Mann wrote:
pls clarify: when async dispatch is enabled, each onMessage event
is handled
by a different thread which is created by the session. Correct?
Not necessarily - there will generally be only 1 thread of control
for the session. ActiveMQ can use more
The journal will be recovered after the power failure - and update
the long term storage the next time the broker starts
On 10 Jan 2007, at 22:37, Vadim Pesochinsky wrote:
Is there any chance I can get an answer for this question, please? ;-)
--
View this message in context:
this issue is resolved for 4.2 - there are a number of different
issues around this (e.g. http://issues.apache.org/activemq/browse/
AMQ-914) - which have been addressed recently.
cheers,
Rob
On 11 Jan 2007, at 18:13, Homer wrote:
I have noticed the same. Luckily, our messages are small
I think the latest snapshot for 4.2 is over a month old and a lot has
changed since then - could you build from src ?
On 12 Jan 2007, at 09:28, Danielius Jurna wrote:
Yes, kaha persistance stores directly to the disk, but last time
I've checked
it (few days ago) it was still using memory
In that case - if you've a good test case you could submit, I'm sure
you'll get a lot of folks (me included) willing to tune ActiveMq for
this scenario
cheers,
Rob
On 12 Jan 2007, at 13:17, Abdul Alhazred wrote:
Yeah, I have exactly that scenario ;)
James.Strachan wrote:
On 1/11/07,
Unfortunately this isn't fixed until 4.2 (the fix is in SVN - so you
could build from source or wait for the next snapshot)
cheers,
rob
On 12 Jan 2007, at 13:35, krishnadas wrote:
Hi ,
Now i am getting Same exception but for another class Brokerservice
class i
am giving the full stack
Hi Danielus,
it would be great if you could submit a test case for this - It would
help me fix the issue you're seeing
cheers,
Rob
On 12 Jan 2007, at 09:28, Danielius Jurna wrote:
Yes, kaha persistance stores directly to the disk, but last time
I've checked
it (few days ago) it was
The aim is to get Kaha production ready for the next ActiveMQ release
cheers,
Rob
On 15 Jan 2007, at 16:58, drvillo wrote:
Hi
testing different persistence adapters I've found that the broker
stops handling messages when using kaha persistence.
Attached is a thread dump, the test case is
The big difference between topics and queues is that for queues, if
the messages have a persistent delivery mode, they are always added
to the message store. This is only true for topics if a durable
subscriber exists and is interested in that topic.
By default, the message store used is
Messages are swapped to disk in version 4.2
cheers,
Rob
On 15 Jan 2007, at 21:39, Rainer Klute wrote:
Rob Davies schrieb:
The big difference between topics and queues is that for queues, if
the messages have a persistent delivery mode, they are always
added to
the message store
regards,
Rob Davies
On 16 Jan 2007, at 04:47, Rainer Klute wrote:
Rob Davies schrieb:
Messages are swapped to disk in version 4.2
That's good news! What do I have to do to activate it? I tried a topic
with non-durable subscribers with ActiveMQ
4.2-incubator-20061204.023752-14 and ran
Hi Albert,
a junit test case to reproduce this will really help speed up a
resolution :)
cheers,
Rob
On 22 Jan 2007, at 20:10, Albert Strasheim wrote:
Hello all
On Mon, 22 Jan 2007, James Strachan wrote:
FWIW Id definitely recommend you use non-persistent sending on your
producers
it should be spooling to disk - waiting for a test case :)
cheers,
Rob
On 23 Jan 2007, at 07:26, James Strachan wrote:
I thought that the new spool-to-disk feature should kick in
automatically - obviously not :). Anyone know if that has to be
explicitly enabled?
BTW are you explicitly
reproduced - will fix shortly
On 23 Jan 2007, at 07:26, James Strachan wrote:
I thought that the new spool-to-disk feature should kick in
automatically - obviously not :). Anyone know if that has to be
explicitly enabled?
BTW are you explicitly disabling persistence on ActiveMQ? I think you
On 23 Jan 2007, at 14:09, kennywest wrote:
I have the same issue. Connecting Mule to an ActiveMQ 4.1.
Any hints?
use servicemix ? ;)
--
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Invalid-version%
3A-2%2C-could-not-load-
org.apache.activemq.openwire.v2.MarshallerFactory-
To: activemq-users@geronimo.apache.org
Subject: RE: Invalid version: 2, could not load
org.apache.activemq.openwire.v2.MarshallerFactory
Well, no ;)
I'm not sure if this is related to mule, because the broker is
throwing
this exception.
-Original Message-
From: Rob Davies [mailto:[EMAIL
--
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Stomp-durable-
topic-do-not-UNSUB-tf3042823.html#a8527141
Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
cheers,
Rob Davies
wow! 3.2.2 was solid! Could you post the stack trace with the
concurrent modification exceptions please ?
cheers,
Rob
On 23 Jan 2007, at 19:10, YoungSoul wrote:
I tried the 4.2 snapshot, and while I did not get any stuck
messages, I did
a number of concurrent modification exceptions.
Hi Tim,
please file tickets for these
cheers,
Rob
On 23 Jan 2007, at 21:30, tim.geldart wrote:
Would you like me to file tickets to track either of the
cirumstances below
or are they already known issues that do not require tickets?
rajdavies wrote:
Would one be mistaken to expect
://issues.apache.org/activemq/browse/AMQ-1135
Peter
Rob Davies wrote:
Hi Tim,
please file tickets for these
cheers,
Rob
On 23 Jan 2007, at 21:30, tim.geldart wrote:
Would you like me to file tickets to track either of the
cirumstances below
or are they already known issues that do not require
np -kenneth,
using Mule has that affect on people (sry - couldn't resist!)
cheers,
Rob
On 24 Jan 2007, at 07:48, kennywest wrote:
I feel so stupid. Seems that my ACTIVEMQ_HOME environment variable
was still
pointing to an older version of ActiveMQ. Sorry for the disturbance.
--
View this
Hi Albert,
yes they will - its all the same underlying issue
cheers,
Rob
On 24 Jan 2007, at 18:53, Albert Strasheim wrote:
Hello all
On Wed, 24 Jan 2007, Rob Davies wrote:
I'm fixing these at the moment - though I'd expect it will be closer
to the end of the week when I've finished
could you post a stack trace generated by the exception ?
On 25 Jan 2007, at 07:59, Julian Exenberger wrote:
Hi I suddenly receive this error as well and I am definitely using
activemq
4.1
rajdavies wrote:
np -kenneth,
using Mule has that affect on people (sry - couldn't resist!)
there is a later snapshot - built on the 24th January 2007 - would
you mind trying with that one
cheers,
Rob
On 25 Jan 2007, at 08:55, krishnadas wrote:
Hi fellow members,
When i tried to install activemq4.2 rar with weblogic 9.2 i got the
following error.I used apache-activemq-4.2-
Gulp! - a known issue this is fixed in 4.2
cheers,
Rob
On 25 Jan 2007, at 14:16, Tony Qian wrote:
All,
Sorry for long message. I tried to set up ActiveMQ broker and got
following error when try to create a connection at consumer side.
ActiveMQConnectionFactory factory = new
This looks like jboss.mq is not compliant with the JMS spec. Messages
from a foreign JMS provider (including the Destination) should be
able to be pass through any other JMS compliant JMS provider
cheers,
Rob
On 25 Jan 2007, at 14:14, miniman wrote:
All i have an EJB which i use to send
Jan 2007, at 14:35, Tony Qian wrote:
Rob,
Appreciate your quick response. What's still puzzling me is why the
example code works.
Has version 4.2 been released? I didn't see the download link for
version 4.2. If I need to build it by myself, how do i do it?
thanks,
Tony
Rob Davies wrote on 1/25
I feel your pain - this is fixed in 4.2 - you can get a snapshot here:
http://people.apache.org/repo/m2-snapshot-repository/org/apache/
activemq/apache-activemq/4.2-incubator-SNAPSHOT/
cheers,
Rob
On 25 Jan 2007, at 18:53, igah wrote:
i am using activemq-4.0.2. i am running a test with
you could use temporary queues (which will be unique) ??
On 26 Jan 2007, at 05:50, cafe wrote:
Hello:
In my app I employ activeMQ + Spring…and it consist in many client who
communicate with a server who respond with different message for
different
client through many queue, this queues are
understand you can't upgrade - unfortunately there are too many
changes to do a patch :(
cheers,
Rob
On 26 Jan 2007, at 16:20, igah wrote:
i tried the latest snapshot. it appears to have solved the problem.
but i cannot upgrade to 4.2. is there a patch for 4.0.2 or could
you point
out
Hi Albert,
I think you could need to set the prefetch limit as well - it could
be the clients running out of memory.
I agree we need to allow for configuration of blocking a producer
whilst waiting for space - be that disk or memory - this may take a
few more days to get right :(
cheers,
,
On Fri, 26 Jan 2007, Rob Davies wrote:
Hi Albert,
I think you could need to set the prefetch limit as well - it could
be the clients running out of memory.
Thanks, I'll experiment with the prefetch limit a bit.
I agree we need to allow for configuration of blocking a producer
whilst waiting
could you let us see your configuration of both brokers and some
logging from both please ?
cheers,
rob
On 29 Jan 2007, at 07:32, cbu wrote:
What do you wanna see? I do have a network of brokers running ...
but with
some problems:
parse XML configuration somehow?
Thanks again.
Cheers,
Albert
On Mon, 29 Jan 2007, Rob Davies wrote:
Hi Albert,
from the latest in SVN it's possible to configure the cursor used for
a topic subscriber - which by default is file based. If you use a VM
based cursor, as messages aren't removed
Hi andrew,
could you raise a jira issue for this please: http://
issues.apache.org/activemq/secure/CreateIssue!default.jspa
cheers,
Rob
On 29 Jan 2007, at 19:03, asteele wrote:
I really like the peer transport in ActiveMQ. It seems to be just
the kind
of setup we need. However, we do
1 - 100 of 107 matches
Mail list logo
