[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ARTEMIS-627?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15376983#comment-15376983
]
Martyn Taylor commented on ARTEMIS-627:
---------------------------------------
[~clebertsuconic] [~gemmellr] OK guys how about we add a configuration option
to allow users to set a hard limit on the address size as Robbie suggested. We
can use the existing max-address-size as the soft limit. Once the hard limit
is reached the broker will either reject messages (if the protocol allows it)
or start dropping messages. We'll keep this limit to be switched off by
default thus keeping the existing behaviour (which allows users to exceed this
limit). This won't have much impact on performance we'll need to do a limit
check on each message but it'll be a simple calculation (isAddressSize >=
hardLimit). I think this is the best of both worlds and shouldn't take too
much to implement.
As for controlling AMQP credits, I'm not sure how we can do this appropriately,
we should open another discussion on list on how to tackle it.
> Producer Block does work properly on CORE protocol
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: ARTEMIS-627
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ARTEMIS-627
> Project: ActiveMQ Artemis
> Issue Type: New Feature
> Reporter: Martyn Taylor
>
> To BLOCK production of messages to an address once it reaches a particular
> size in memory, an AddressSetting can be added to the broker that specifies
> the address size, address match string and the address full policy "BLOCK".
> This should block messages once the address is full, however the current
> implementation uses flow control to allocate producers credits, once the
> address is full the broker will not allocate any more credits.
> There are two issues with this approach.
> 1. The main issue is that the credits are not tracked or checked at the
> broker side. The ActiveMQ client takes care of blocking message production
> when it runs out of credit. However, a rogue client could easily allocate
> it's own credits and continue sending. I've tested this by hacking the
> client and it behaves in this way.
> 2. Even in a non hacked client the size of the address could be pushed over
> it's limit, as more credits can be allocated than is available space on the
> address. An address can be full, no more credits are allocated but each
> producer is able to empty it's credits pushing the address over its limit.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
