Github user gaohoward commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/2205
ah sorry about that. I'm closing it.
---
Github user gaohoward closed the pull request at:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/2205
---
Github user gaohoward commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/1950
I think it's ok.
---
Github user clebertsuconic commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/2187#discussion_r206733019
--- Diff:
artemis-core-client/src/main/java/org/apache/activemq/artemis/core/protocol/core/impl/ActiveMQSessionContext.java
---
@@
Github user clebertsuconic commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/2203
@franz1981 please watch the examples. On my private CI an example failed on
your branch.
---
Github user clebertsuconic commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/2205
I pulled a direct commit into 2.6.x, please close this PR.
---
Github user clebertsuconic commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/1950
@michaelandrepearce @gaohoward merged with an additional fix.
if there's any change you like I can add an additional PR. if you could
review please?
---
Github user asfgit closed the pull request at:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/1950
---
Github user gaohoward commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/2205
I think the ci build test failures relates to environment. All passes on my
local machine.
---
GitHub user gaohoward opened a pull request:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/2205
ARTEMIS-1995 Client fail over fails when live shut down too soon
In a live-backup scenario, if the live is restarted and shutdown too soon,
the client have a chance to fail on
Github user clebertsuconic commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/1950
The test added is also wrong.. a sender should block while there are no
credits instead of holding runnables on the server.
---
Github user clebertsuconic commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/1950
This needs some work on the model before it can be merged.
---
Github user michaelandrepearce commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/2155
@wy96f can you look at the failed build? Ideally need a succesful pr build
to merge
---
Github user michaelandrepearce commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/1950
@clebertsuconic Whats occuring on this one? We safe to merge this to master
now?
---
Github user asfgit closed the pull request at:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/2196
---
Github user asfgit closed the pull request at:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/2195
---
Github user asfgit closed the pull request at:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/2197
---
Github user clebertsuconic commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/2197
bringing this into 2.6.x
---
Github user clebertsuconic commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/2204
bringing this into 2.6.x
---
Github user asfgit closed the pull request at:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/2204
---
Github user clebertsuconic commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/2202
tests?
---
Github user asfgit closed the pull request at:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/2200
---
Github user asfgit closed the pull request at:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/2191
---
Github user cshannon commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/2191
@clebertsuconic and @michaelandrepearce - i rebased against master and it
looks like the tests all pass so this should be good to merge
---
Github user clebertsuconic commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/2193
pulled it into 2.6.x
---
Github user asfgit closed the pull request at:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/2193
---
Github user clebertsuconic commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/2193
ok.. merging .. thanks for clarifying.. I have hard a hard time following
so many emails :)
---
Hi All,
Its been some time and some progress i think has been made in the roadmap that
was made on the wiki.
Notable progress once the next release occurs im aware of:
FQQN enhancements for virtual topic use cases
Exclusive consumer support
Destinatiin features: consumersBeforeDispatch and
Github user clebertsuconic commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/2203
@michaelandrepearce there are no changes around the journal...
We already have a profile that will ignore a lot of tests.. and anyone
running the full testsuite would still
+1 (non-binding)
Thanks for the release !
regards,
François Papon
fpa...@apache.org
Le 31/07/2018 à 17:13, Christopher Shannon a écrit :
> Hi Everyone,
>
> I have created the ActiveMQ 5.15.5 release and it's ready for a vote. This
> release includes over 20 fixes/improvements.
>
> The list of
Github user michaelandrepearce commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/2203
@clebertsuconic before i went on holiday it didnt seem to error as much as
it is now, i wonder if some recent merge has destabilized the build? I would
worry about ignoring it,
On 07/31/2018 09:13 AM, Christopher Shannon wrote:
Hi Everyone,
I have created the ActiveMQ 5.15.5 release and it's ready for a vote. This
release includes over 20 fixes/improvements.
The list of resolved issues is here:
Github user asfgit closed the pull request at:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/2198
---
Github user clebertsuconic commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/2198
@michaelandrepearce Ok.. there's an issue with packaging in Karaf for Util
depending on how you use. I'm sure it will arise again.
---
Github user michaelandrepearce commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/2198
@clebertsuconic i removed the custom AtomicBooleanFieldUpdater as
@franz1981 wanted and just used AtomicIntegerFieldUpdater direct. Seems i fix
the issue and make @franz1981
Github user clebertsuconic commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/2203
@franz1981 so are you adding a test?
---
Github user clebertsuconic commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/2198
@michaelandrepearce What did you do to fix the karaf verification? i lost
some sleep the other trying to figure it out and I'm now curious.
---
Github user clebertsuconic commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/2203
@michaelandrepearce would be too much of a hack to add a -Ptravis profile
and add a property to ignore those tests?
Those tests run at least daily on my CI and they never
Github user michaelandrepearce commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/2198
@clebertsuconic re-pushed to kick off build again and all green. You ok to
merge?
---
Github user clebertsuconic commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/2200
@michaelandrepearce let me see if it builds and I will merge it.
---
Github user franz1981 commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/2203
@michaelandrepearce ahah fine!
> btw how you get a clean PR build ? without the damn
MultiThreadAsynchronousFileTest failing...like it has been for most PR's
recently?
Github user michaelandrepearce commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/2200
@franz1981 test failure is un-related, its the same one plaguing other PR's
currently. If you're happy if you could merge?
---
Github user michaelandrepearce commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/2204
@clebertsuconic @franz1981 test failure is unrelated thats failing for many
PR's MultiThreadAsynchronousFileTest.
Could you look at this and merged, this caused an
Github user michaelandrepearce commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/2203
@franz1981 once you do fix for this with test and this is merged, ill fix
exclusive quickly, as then i can just rip your hard work :P :P :P
---
Github user franz1981 commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/2203
> exclusive yes i think would have similar issue, after all it followed
the same logic of message groups in part. It would be easy to fix, as in the
same place / if statement just
Github user michaelandrepearce commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/2203#discussion_r206558769
--- Diff:
artemis-server/src/main/java/org/apache/activemq/artemis/core/server/impl/QueueImpl.java
---
@@ -2370,10 +2370,10 @@
Github user michaelandrepearce commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/2203
@franz1981 i exclusive yes i think would have similar issue, after all it
followed the same logic of message groups in part.
---
Github user clebertsuconic commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/2203
@franz1981 make a test that will exercise the loop. Try to get a
synchronize on Queue...
if the test hangs.. it's a bug... use a timeout tag on the test.
---
+1
Thanks for doing the release, Chrsitopher.
--
Sent from: http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/ActiveMQ-Dev-f2368404.html
Github user graben commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/2193
Yes, I commented in Jira that either via core protocol (Artemis) and
ActiveMQ are returning XA_OK. Actually all events only get prepared and
therefor data loss. My test case (simple
Github user clebertsuconic commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/2193
@graben I wasn't sure what to do with this since there's no test.. I have
no idea how to validate it yet.
do you have any parallels to compare what would be the proper
GitHub user michaelandrepearce opened a pull request:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/2204
ARTEMIS-2001 - JMSXGroupID and JMSXUserID in getPropertyNames
Ensure JMSXGroupID and JMSXUserID is correctly returned by JMS
getPropertyNames when set.
You can merge this
Github user graben commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/2193
@clebertsuconic : Friendly reminder :-)
---
Hi Everyone,
I have created the ActiveMQ 5.15.5 release and it's ready for a vote. This
release includes over 20 fixes/improvements.
The list of resolved issues is here:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12311210=12343307
You can get the release artifacts here:
Github user franz1981 commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/2203
I have already run the entire test suite that is already filled of AMQP and
CORE JMS message group tests AFAIK.
About the performance implications (not anymore 100% CPU) I don't know
Github user dpauls commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-nms-amqp/pull/2
@tabish121 I appreciate the effort you've put into reviewing this. Just a
quick ping to see if there's anything else we can do to get this PR merged in.
If you just need to take another
Github user franz1981 commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/2203
@clebertsuconic Please take a look if the change seems to break any other
logic and @michaelandrepearce if exclusive consumers should be affected by a
similar issue (IMO it shouldn't be
GitHub user franz1981 opened a pull request:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/2203
ARTEMIS-1999 Broker uses 100% core's CPU time if msg grouping is used
The deliver loop won't give up trying to deliver messages when
back-pressure kicks in (credits and/or TCP) if
GitHub user RoddieKieley opened a pull request:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/2202
ARTEMIS-2000: For ScaleDown set the RoutingType header property on thâ¦
â¦e message so if the address does not exist on the other end it will be
created correctly.
You can merge
Github user RoddieKieley closed the pull request at:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/2201
---
Github user michaelandrepearce commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/2187#discussion_r206424803
--- Diff:
artemis-core-client/src/main/java/org/apache/activemq/artemis/core/protocol/core/impl/ActiveMQSessionContext.java
---
@@
Github user michaelandrepearce commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/2187#discussion_r206422634
--- Diff:
artemis-core-client/src/main/java/org/apache/activemq/artemis/core/protocol/core/impl/PacketImpl.java
---
@@ -31,7 +31,8 @@
Github user michaelandrepearce commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/commit/a2da41ee2e347bcf8fe721bded89e4a78ca14cfb#commitcomment-29899679
In
artemis-jms-client/src/main/java/org/apache/activemq/artemis/jms/client/ActiveMQMessageProducer.java:
Github user michaelandrepearce commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/commit/a2da41ee2e347bcf8fe721bded89e4a78ca14cfb#commitcomment-29899636
In
64 matches
Mail list logo