[
https://issues.apache.org/activemq/browse/CAMEL-683?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Veit Guna reopened CAMEL-683:
-----------------------------
Hi.
Sorry for reopening but the redeliveryDelay problem still exists. But it seems
no camel problem then because I'm not using camel anymore, instead the
redeliveryPolicy on the AQConnectionFactory.
So, should that be moved to the AQM project then? There I'm using AMQ 5.1.0
(Camel 1.3).
> Redelivery on a failure doesn't respect the initialRedeliveryDelay on the
> first attempt.
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: CAMEL-683
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/activemq/browse/CAMEL-683
> Project: Apache Camel
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: camel-jms
> Affects Versions: 1.4.0
> Environment: Linux, ActiveMQ 5.1, Spring 2.5.x with transacted
> DefaultMessageListenerContainer
> Reporter: Veit Guna
> Assignee: Claus Ibsen
> Fix For: 1.4.0
>
>
> Hi.
> I'm using ActiveMQ 5.1 together with Spring's DefaultMessageListenerContainer
> to enable MDPs. I'm using the redeliveryPolicy to enable redelivery on
> failures during consumption of a message. ActiveMQ configuration looks like
> this:
> <camelContext id="camel"
> xmlns="http://activemq.apache.org/camel/schema/spring";>
> <route errorHandlerRef="deadLetterErrorHandler">
> <from uri="activemq:NEW" />
> </route>
> </camelContext>
> <bean id="deadLetterErrorHandler"
> class="org.apache.camel.builder.DeadLetterChannelBuilder">
> <property name="redeliveryPolicy" ref="redeliveryPolicyConfig"/>
> </bean>
> <bean id="redeliveryPolicyConfig"
> class="org.apache.camel.processor.RedeliveryPolicy">
> <property name="maximumRedeliveries" value="4"/>
> <property name="initialRedeliveryDelay" value="30000"/>
> <property name="useExponentialBackOff" value="true"/>
> <property name="backOffMultiplier" value="2" />
> </bean>
> Now if a failure occurs, the configured delay isn't used on the first
> redelivery attempt. Instead redelivery takes place immediately after the
> failure occured. This sounds odd to me, since the property is even called
> initialRedeliveryDelay :). I know that maybe this was caused due to the
> following issue:
> https://issues.apache.org/activemq/browse/AMQ-1032
> In my opinion immediately redelivery isn't very useful in most cases. If a
> failure occurs, it won't be fixed some ms later :). So my suggestion is (in
> respect to AMQ-1032) to have two options:
> initialRedeliveryDelay
> redeliveryDelay
> So both configurations would be possible. For AMQ-1032 just configure
> initialRedeliveryDelay to 0. Otherwise just take the redeliveryDelay as
> initialRedeliveryDelay to get what I want :).
> Does this make sense?
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
