[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AMQ-5562?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
 ]

Christopher L. Shannon resolved AMQ-5562.
-----------------------------------------
    Resolution: Duplicate

This is an old issue but it has been resolved by AMQ-7352

> Anonymous producers do not raise ActiveMQ.Advisory.Producer.Queue.> advisory
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: AMQ-5562
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AMQ-5562
>             Project: ActiveMQ
>          Issue Type: Bug
>            Reporter: Kevin Burton
>            Priority: Major
>
> If I send to a producer with:
>         MessageProducer producer = session.createProducer( dest );
>         producer.send( message );
> That works and I receive the advisory.
> However, if send like this:
>         MessageProducer producer = session.createProducer( null );
>         producer.send( dest, message );
> The advisory isn’t raised.  I have a unit test to confirm that the message 
> was delivered to the queue and that it fails to raise the advisory.
> The problem is that the second method is about 5x faster than the first.  
> I can certainly rewrite my code, but this could lead to bugs where code 
> expects to receive the advisory notice but now there’s a back door to send 
> messages without the advisory message meaning that you could break production 
> code.
> On the list, Timothy Bish noted:
> > This is by design as the second case creates an anonymous producer that can 
> > send to any destination that it has permission to write to.  Sending that 
> > advisory every time an anonymous producer sent a message to a given 
> > destination would create a flood of advisories which would not really be of 
> > help.
> However:
> > I mean I can create the flood of advisories now anyway. I just have to 
> > manually create a non-anonymous producer and it would then send the same 
> > number of advisories.
> > Now it’s just slower and you’ve put a burden on me to maintain an LRU cache 
> > and expiry so that I can have reasonable performance :-(
> I think this is a bug.  If you're experiencing floods you can always turn off 
> advisories or be more specific in which queues you would like notifications 
> about.



--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.3.4#803005)

Reply via email to