Github user jbertram commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/1616
I see the doc as just informational. IMO it's not promoting one option
over the other, but simply explaining what options exist. In any event, I
changed it to avoid this potential bit
Github user michaelandrepearce commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/1616#discussion_r147315800
--- Diff: examples/features/sub-modules/inter-broker-bridge/README.md ---
@@ -0,0 +1,143 @@
+# Inter-broker Bridging
+
+An
Github user jbertram commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/1616#discussion_r147315575
--- Diff: examples/features/sub-modules/inter-broker-bridge/README.md ---
@@ -0,0 +1,143 @@
+# Inter-broker Bridging
+
+An example
Github user michaelandrepearce commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/1616#discussion_r147314917
--- Diff: examples/features/sub-modules/inter-broker-bridge/README.md ---
@@ -0,0 +1,143 @@
+# Inter-broker Bridging
+
+An
Github user michaelandrepearce commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/1616#discussion_r147313983
--- Diff: pom.xml ---
@@ -112,6 +112,7 @@
0.7.9
1.4.3
+ 3.1.4.RELEASE
--- End diff --
Github user michaelandrepearce commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/1616#discussion_r147313906
--- Diff: pom.xml ---
@@ -112,6 +112,7 @@
0.7.9
1.4.3
+ 3.1.4.RELEASE
--- End diff --
Github user jbertram commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/1616#discussion_r147313825
--- Diff: examples/features/sub-modules/inter-broker-bridge/pom.xml ---
@@ -12,37 +12,24 @@ WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY KIND, either
Github user michaelandrepearce commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/1616
@jbertram as @clebertsuconic i know you didnât change this, but a lot of
content is changed and is promoting a very camel approach over the use of the
Artemis JMS bridge. We
Github user jbertram commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/1616#discussion_r147313493
--- Diff: pom.xml ---
@@ -112,6 +112,7 @@
0.7.9
1.4.3
+ 3.1.4.RELEASE
--- End diff --
Wow yes.
Github user jbertram commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/1616#discussion_r147313440
--- Diff: examples/features/sub-modules/inter-broker-bridge/README.md ---
@@ -0,0 +1,143 @@
+# Inter-broker Bridging
+
+An example
Github user michaelandrepearce commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/1616#discussion_r147313218
--- Diff: pom.xml ---
@@ -112,6 +112,7 @@
0.7.9
1.4.3
+ 3.1.4.RELEASE
--- End diff --
Github user michaelandrepearce commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/1616#discussion_r147313150
--- Diff: examples/features/sub-modules/inter-broker-bridge/pom.xml ---
@@ -12,37 +12,24 @@ WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY
Github user michaelandrepearce commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/1616#discussion_r147312979
--- Diff: examples/features/sub-modules/inter-broker-bridge/README.md ---
@@ -0,0 +1,143 @@
+# Inter-broker Bridging
+
+An
Github user michaelandrepearce commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/1616#discussion_r147312753
--- Diff: examples/features/sub-modules/inter-broker-bridge/README.md ---
@@ -0,0 +1,143 @@
+# Inter-broker Bridging
+
+An
Github user michaelandrepearce commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/1616#discussion_r147312523
--- Diff: examples/features/sub-modules/inter-broker-bridge/README.md ---
@@ -0,0 +1,143 @@
+# Inter-broker Bridging
--- End
Github user clebertsuconic commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/1616
You probably should have the component updates on a different commit.
---
Github user clebertsuconic commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/1616
the airlift update broke the distribution...
also, I know you didn't change it.. but there are a few classes that you
are moving that have the @author tag.. can you
GitHub user jbertram opened a pull request:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/1616
ARTEMIS-1467 clean up example
- Rename example project
- Leverage built-in 5.x Camel support instead of using WAR
- Clarify instructions
- Fix pom names/structure
You can
Github user asfgit closed the pull request at:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/1576
---
Github user clebertsuconic commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/1576#discussion_r147246049
--- Diff:
artemis-server/src/main/java/org/apache/activemq/artemis/core/server/impl/jdbc/ScheduledLeaseLock.java
---
@@ -0,0 +1,44 @@
Github user clebertsuconic commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/1576
Nice job!
---
The related PR is https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/1607
for anyone not following along thus far, or later reference.
My main view there was that such an extension would be better
maintained seperate from the main broker repository+distribution for a
variety of reasons. After that I
Github user asfgit closed the pull request at:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/1605
---
Github user jbertram commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/1594
I updated the commit message and the JIRA to clarify that this is simple
**an** approach, not necessarily the recommended approach.
---
Github user mtaylor commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/1594
Also the example version is wrong. It should be aligned to the parent pom
version. @stanlyDoge can you follow up please.
---
Github user michaelandrepearce commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/1607
Thanks guys for the time, I have kicked off back the dev mail list to
discuss the idea of having a sub project for service connectors and other
integrations like the spring
Github user mtaylor commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/1594
@clebertsuconic +1. Let's change the JIRA title. The commit has already
landed but actually the doc doesn't mention anything about recommended.
---
Github user mtaylor commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/1594
@stanlyDoge ^^
---
As noted on the PR part of the PR discussion is should Service Connectors exist
with the broker code.
Service Connectors / Extensions are ActiveMQ Artemis specific.
I think having them within the project space is good so we can grow an eco
system of some, people can just use will aid in
Github user clebertsuconic commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/1594
@jbertram I didn't want to call that "The recommended approach"...
The CLI is much easier.. say you had 1000 destinations.. you would have to
write a tool to write the
Github user asfgit closed the pull request at:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/1594
---
Github user jbertram commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/1594
Using a bridge is a valid way to move messages between brokers so I'll go
ahead and merge this one. If we want to add another example using the
export/import CLI tools later that's
Github user michaelandrepearce commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/1605
@franz1981 this is much cleaner +1, also its good to see the existing logic
remains pretty much the same, just now with HDR being captured.
---
Github user michaelandrepearce commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/1605#discussion_r147177663
--- Diff:
artemis-cli/src/main/java/org/apache/activemq/artemis/cli/commands/util/SyncCalculation.java
---
@@ -55,32 +78,30 @@ public
Github user michaelandrepearce commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/1605#discussion_r147177271
--- Diff:
artemis-cli/src/main/java/org/apache/activemq/artemis/cli/commands/util/SyncCalculation.java
---
@@ -55,32 +78,30 @@ public
Github user tabish121 commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/1594
LevelDB has been deprecated for quite some time and is not officially
supported in 5.x releases any longer so I wouldn't waste time on that one.
---
Github user mtaylor commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/1594
@jbertram @clebertsuconic After looking at that tool it appears it's for
KahaDB store only. If this is the recommended tool going forward then I guess
we need to add support for other
Github user asfgit closed the pull request at:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/1615
---
Github user cshannon commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/1607
I agree with @mtaylor that I think this should be maintained outside the
broker for the reasons he already mentioned.
---
Github user gemmellr commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/1607
I don't think that makes sense personally. If the end view is that it
should be maintained outwith the broker repo/distribution, that is where it
should go from the outset. In the
Github user franz1981 commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/1605
@clebertsuconic @michaelandrepearce
> IMO could be a good idea to provide this feature it is to drop at all the
timeout calculation if a user just want the latencies percentiles and
Github user franz1981 commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/1605
@clebertsuconic
> wouldn't be easier to keep all the original code and just add the
Histogram.. without changing how callbacks are happening for example.. (The
reason why you
42 matches
Mail list logo
