Thanks a lot ! I will focus to include this in 5.16.2 and 5.15.15.
Regards JB > Le 24 mars 2021 à 10:42, Jonathan Gallimore <jonathan.gallim...@gmail.com> a > écrit : > > New JIRA ticket is here: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AMQ-8201. > I've removed the two backport PRs and updated the commit in the PR for > master to reference the JIRA. > > Many thanks! > > Jon > > On Wed, Mar 24, 2021 at 9:12 AM Jonathan Gallimore < > jonathan.gallim...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Thank you Chris, Gary and JB for the feedback, I appreciate it!. I'll open >> a separate JIRA ticket for this and I'll update the commit to reference it. >> >> Thanks >> >> Jon >> >> On Wed, Mar 24, 2021 at 9:09 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofre <j...@nanthrax.net> >> wrote: >> >>> Hi Jon, >>> >>> Just took a quick look on the PR and it looks good to me. >>> >>> Just a side note: please open the PR only based on master (not for other >>> branches). I do the cherry pick once master is up to date. >>> >>> Let’s wait other feedback before merging. >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Regards >>> JB >>> >>>> Le 23 mars 2021 à 20:49, Jonathan Gallimore < >>> jonathan.gallim...@gmail.com> a écrit : >>>> >>>> Hi >>>> >>>> I've been looking at a problem I ran into here where messages are >>> consumed, >>>> and acknowledged, but are then later redelivered to the consumer again >>>> after a broker restart. >>>> >>>> The consumer is running with transacted sessions, and looking in >>> KahaDB, I >>>> can see a KAHA_REMOVE_MESSAGE_COMMAND, with the local transaction ID >>> added >>>> to the journal, and then a KAHA_COMMIT_COMMAND after it. Some time >>> later, I >>>> see the exact same KAHA_REMOVE_MESSAGE_COMMAND appended to the journal >>>> again, with the exact same transaction information, but no >>>> corresponding KAHA_COMMIT_COMMAND. This appears to follow a >>>> KAHA_REWRITTEN_DATA_FILE_COMMAND. >>>> >>>> It looks like the ack compaction method is forwarding the >>> acknowledgement, >>>> but not the commit - it appears that the commit is only forwarded in the >>>> case of an XA transaction. >>>> >>>> I notice that there are some tests around this in AMQ-7067. I've >>> managed to >>>> reproduce this with a further test case in AMQ8067Test.java, and I have >>>> created a PR for this here: https://github.com/apache/activemq/pull/636 >>> , >>>> and backported to 5.16.x https://github.com/apache/activemq/pull/637 >>> and >>>> 5.15.x. https://github.com/apache/activemq/pull/638 >>>> >>>> Are there other cases that should be tested around this? >>>> >>>> Thanks >>>> >>>> Jon >>> >>>
