[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ARTEMIS-2375?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=17019721#comment-17019721
]
Justin Bertram edited comment on ARTEMIS-2375 at 1/20/20 8:20 PM:
------------------------------------------------------------------
Sorry for the delayed response. I was AFK last week.
It might make more sense to approach this the same way that diverts do with an
exclusivity flag. For example, diverts can potentially break what users expect
by turning 1 message into 2 by using a non-exclusive configuration to split the
message flow. This is somewhat similar to how wildcard addresses work. I think
a similar solution which lived in the {{PostOffice}} would fit more with the
overall address model rather than pushing this into the {{ServerConsumer}}. It
would probably be a smaller change as well since {{Binding}} already has an
idea of exclusivity. It might also be possible to implement this as an
address-setting so that it's not just a broker-wide flag.
was (Author: jbertram):
Sorry for the delay response. I was AFK last week.
It might make more sense to approach this the same way that diverts do with an
exclusivity flag. For example, diverts can potentially break what users expect
by turning 1 message into 2 by using a non-exclusive configuration to split the
message flow. This is somewhat similar to how wildcard addresses work. I think
a similar solution which lived in the {{PostOffice}} would fit more with the
overall address model rather than pushing this into the {{ServerConsumer}}. It
would probably be a smaller change as well since {{Binding}} already has an
idea of exclusivity. It might also be possible to implement this as an
address-setting so that it's not just a broker-wide flag.
> JMS, Wildcard destination consumer, and Acknowledgements going to wrong queue
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: ARTEMIS-2375
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ARTEMIS-2375
> Project: ActiveMQ Artemis
> Issue Type: Bug
> Affects Versions: 2.9.0
> Reporter: Craig Schmidt
> Assignee: Justin Bertram
> Priority: Major
>
> I have an ActiveMQ server set up where I have multiple (and unbounded) queues
> which differ only in the last component. e.g. myqueue.1, myqueue.2,
> myqueue.4, etc. The last component is from a database that will have a
> varying set of customers defined - and I want to set up one queue for each
> customer. (I want a separate queue - the third party we're talking to needs
> throttling at our 'customer' level.
> The address setting looks like this in broker.xml:
> {code:xml}
> <address-setting match="myqueue.#">
> <dead-letter-address>myqueue.DLQ</dead-letter-address>
> <expiry-address>myqueue.ExpiryQueue</expiry-address>
> <redelivery-delay>500</redelivery-delay>
> <max-size-bytes>-1</max-size-bytes>
> <message-counter-history-day-limit>10</message-counter-history-day-limit>
> <address-full-policy>PAGE</address-full-policy>
> <auto-create-queues>true</auto-create-queues>
> <auto-create-addresses>true</auto-create-addresses>
> <auto-create-jms-queues>true</auto-create-jms-queues>
> <auto-create-jms-topics>true</auto-create-jms-topics>
> <max-delivery-attempts>3</max-delivery-attempts>
> </address-setting>
> {code}
> I have a producer that creates the queue name based on the customer key, and
> uses JmsMessagingTemplate.convertAndSent(queueName, message). I have a
> consumer annotated like this:
> {code:java}
> @JmsListener(destination = "myqueue.#", containerFactory =
> "throttledLongCodeFactory")
> public void processLongCodeMessage1(Session session, Message<MessageRequest>
> message) throws JMSException {
> //... do the message handling - no ActiveMQ accesses in here...
> session.commit();
> }
> {code}
> FWIW, here's the code for the throttledLongCodeFactory:
> {code:java}
> @Bean public DefaultJmsListenerContainerFactory
> throttledLongCodeFactory(DefaultJmsListenerContainerFactoryConfigurer
> configurer) {
> ActiveMQConnectionFactory connectionFactory =
> createActiveMQConnectionFactory();
> // For throttling. Used to limit the number of messages a consumer will
> handle per second. Default is -1.
> Integer maxConsumerRate =
> appProperties.getArtemis().getLongCode().getMaxConsumerRate();
> if (maxConsumerRate != null) {
> connectionFactory.setConsumerMaxRate(maxConsumerRate);
> }
> // This provides all boot's default to this factory, including the message
> converter
> DefaultJmsListenerContainerFactory factory = new
> DefaultJmsListenerContainerFactory();
> configurer.configure(factory, connectionFactory);
> return factory;
> }
> {code}
> What I'm finding in looking at the ActiveMQ Management Console is that the
> consumer ACK's are going to a (new) queue "myqueue.#" (i.e. literally has the
> '#' in the name), rather than the actual source queue for each message. In
> the consumer, I can see the actual source queue name (e.g. "myqueue.2") by
> inspecting the ClientMessageImpl field 'address'. What I'd like is for the
> ACK's to go to the source queue. the way it is, my specific queues are just
> building up the number of messages they contain, which isn't doing the
> Artemis server memory any good.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.3.4#803005)
