Re: [VOTE] Apache ActiveMQ Artemis 2.24.0

Well done  +1 binding The page cache change/removal is a great improvement to the user experience!! Il mar 26 lug 2022, 20:31 Clebert Suconic ha scritto: > I would like to propose an Apache ActiveMQ Artemis 2.24.0 release > > There are two features added as part of this release: > > - Paging

Re: [VOTE] Apache ActiveMQ Artemis 2.23.0

+1 Il mer 8 giu 2022, 18:24 Robbie Gemmell ha scritto: > +1 > > I checked things over as follows: > - Verified the signature + checksum files. > - Checked for LICENCE and NOTICE files in the archives. > - Checked licence headers in the source archive by running: > "mvn apache-rat:check" > -

Re: [VOTE] Apache ActiveMQ Artemis 2.22.0

+1 binding Very happy re the change on the cluster connection!!! Il gio 28 apr 2022, 18:25 Clebert Suconic ha scritto: > I would like to propose an Apache ActiveMQ Artemis 2.22.0 release. > > > There are no new features on this release, however there are many > improvements and bug fixes. > >

Re: [VOTE] Apache ActiveMQ Artemis 2.21.0

Let me resend my vote too: +1 (binding) :) Il giorno lun 28 mar 2022 alle ore 10:38 Robbie Gemmell < robbie.gemm...@gmail.com> ha scritto: > Good question. Given it doesnt change that there are enough binding +1 > votes, it probably doesnt matter either way, but since we actually > said they

Re: [VOTE] Apache ActiveMQ Artemis 2.21.0

Lovely :) Il dom 27 mar 2022, 17:32 Bruce Snyder ha scritto: > Yes. > > Bruce > > On Sat, Mar 26, 2022 at 17:37 Clebert Suconic > wrote: > > > Can I count Robbie and Francesco votes as binding already ? > > > > > > If I can’t. Can you recast them as binding please ? > > > > On Sat, Mar 26,

Re: [VOTE] Apache ActiveMQ Artemis 2.21.0

+1 (not binding) Il mer 23 mar 2022, 08:40 Domenico Francesco Bruscino ha scritto: > +1 (non binding) > > * Checked parent version in pom.xml files using `grep -LPrz --include > pom.xml "(.|\n)*2.20.0<\/version>(.|\n)*<\/parent>" ./` > * Ran binary broker instance on Fedora 32 using OpenJDK 11

Re: Interesting/surprising performance wrt. NON_PERSISTENT messaging

HI Endre, you can try using https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/3857 the perf client tool to quickly check these differences too. Giving me some feedback on the tool eheh :P It's based on JMS 2 asynchronous send, although not so much adopted, has the interesting feature to allow many

Re: [jira] [Updated] (ARTEMIS-3619) Compacting generates .cmp files until disk is full when scheduled messages are in journal files

We have recently fixed a bug on the journal that was causing excessive compaction...can you check with th latest version? Il mar 21 dic 2021, 07:30 Dave Myron (Jira) ha scritto: > > [ >

Re: [VOTE] Apache ActiveMQ Artemis 2.20.0

+1 Il giorno gio 16 dic 2021 alle ore 14:17 Howard Gao ha scritto: > +1 > > On Thu, Dec 16, 2021 at 2:13 AM Havret wrote: > > > +1 (non-binding) > > > > I've run the tests against ArtemisNetClient --> > > https://github.com/Havret/dotnet-activemq-artemis-client/pull/317 It's > all > > green,

Re: [jira] [Created] (ARTEMIS-3587) After upgrade: AMQ224107: The Critical Analyzer detected slow paths on the broker.

Can you past the full log to help troubleshooting which path is now interested by it? Il lun 22 nov 2021, 12:35 Sebastian T (Jira) ha scritto: > Sebastian T created ARTEMIS-3587: > > > Summary: After upgrade: AMQ224107: The Critical Analyzer >

Re: [jira] [Commented] (ARTEMIS-3572) Address Memory Used increases by 60% when messages are moved to another queue

If the messages are encoded in amqp and core, they shouldn't be decoded (and their memory on heap, accounted) until delivered. It is an optimization I have implemented last year...I agree we need to investigate a bit more on this, but I would like to give all the relevant info. Il lun 15 nov

Re: ActiveMQ Feathercast interview request

Me too! Il ven 27 ago 2021, 20:19 Matt Pavlovich ha scritto: > Hi Rich! > > Thanks for reaching out, I’d happy to participate. Been working with > ActiveMQ since around 2005 and joined on as a committer team a few years > later. > > Thanks, > Matt Pavlovich > > > On Aug 27, 2021, at 11:55 AM,

Re: [VOTE] Apache ActiveMQ Artemis 2.18.0 release

+1 (non-binding) Il giorno gio 12 ago 2021 alle ore 16:53 Justin Bertram ha scritto: > +1 (binding) > > > Justin > > On Mon, Aug 9, 2021 at 1:54 PM Clebert Suconic > wrote: > > > I would like to propose an Apache ActiveMQ Artemis 2.18.0 release > > > > This is a substantial release involving

Re: [jira] [Commented] (ARTEMIS-3272) Remaining AIO issue from ARTEMIS-3084

I suggest to use XFS because libAIO still perform many blocking operations with ext4 while approaching to the max depth I/O queue eh under heavy load or with a slow disk Il ven 30 apr 2021, 21:21 Anton Roskvist (Jira) ha scritto: > > [ >

Re: [VOTE] Apache ActiveMQ Artemis 2.17.0 RC2

+1 !!! Il sab 13 feb 2021, 09:38 Michael André Pearce ha scritto: > +1 (binding) > > Sent from my iPad > > > On 12 Feb 2021, at 21:05, Christopher Shannon < > christopher.l.shan...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > +1, looks good > > > >> On Fri, Feb 12, 2021 at 3:56 PM Justin Bertram > wrote: > >> >

Re: [PROPOSAL] Minimal JDK on ActiveMQ Artemis...

+1 !! Il giorno gio 14 gen 2021 alle ore 20:33 Christopher Shannon < christopher.l.shan...@gmail.com> ha scritto: > +1 from me, JDK 11 has been around a couple years now so I think it's fine. > > It would be nice to be able to use some of the new language features in the > broker. > > On Thu,

Re: [VOTE] Apache ActiveMQ Artemis 2.16.0

+1 well done folks! Il mar 3 nov 2020, 09:47 Domenico Francesco Bruscino ha scritto: > +1 > > * Checked parent version in pom.xml files using `grep -LPrz --include > pom.xml "(.|\n)*2.16.0<\/version>(.|\n)*<\/parent>" ./` > * Ran binary broker instance on Fedora 32 and Windows 10 using OpenJDK

Re: [VOTE] Apache ActiveMQ Artemis 2.15.0 release

+1!! Il mar 25 ago 2020, 20:48 Domenico Francesco Bruscino ha scritto: > I would like to propose an Apache ActiveMQ Artemis 2.15.0 release. > > We added these new features as part of 2.15.0: > > [ARTEMIS-2847] - socks5h support > [ARTEMIS-2855] - Define a new broker plugin to track XA

Re: [jira] [Work logged] (ARTEMIS-2785) io.netty.util.internal.OutOfDirectMemoryError during uncompress

This issue was present from a long time looking at the commit history Il mar 2 giu 2020, 11:40 ASF GitHub Bot (Jira) ha scritto: > > [ >

Re: [VOTE] Apache ActiveMQ Artemis 2.13.0

+1 well done!! Il lun 18 mag 2020, 18:57 Howard Gao ha scritto: > +1. > > On Tue, May 19, 2020 at 12:26 AM Clebert Suconic < > clebert.suco...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > I would like to propose an Apache ActiveMQ Artemis 2.13.0 release. > > > > > > This release will include these features: > > >

Re: [DISCUSSION/VOTE] Primitive specialized collections in Java

It's a fair point: yes is a professor of the Unimilano university, but is the whole university (similar to MIT) that collaborate to maintain it. He has built the template to autogenerate the different types of collections and the library itself exists from many years (> 10 years), used especially

Re: [DISCUSSION/REQUEST] General request on writing new tests.

+100 very good advices and hints indeed, thanks Clebert! Will do! Il giorno lun 27 apr 2020 alle ore 18:02 Clebert Suconic < clebert.suco...@gmail.com> ha scritto: > I think this is a general request applying for any test you write on > any project: > > - When you write a new test, please make

Re: [VOTE] Apache ActiveMQ Artemis 2.12.0 release

+1 non-binding Il ven 17 apr 2020, 23:53 Clebert Suconic ha scritto: > I would like to propose an Apache ActiveMQ Artemis 2.12.0 release. > > We added the following features as part of 2.12.0: > > [ARTEMIS-1194] - SOCKS proxy support > [ARTEMIS-1975] - Real LargeMessage support for AMQP >

Re: NO-JIRA

Good idea Domenico, well done! Seems that I am not the only one that love contributing on the weekend eheh collective hug (at distance) Il dom 5 apr 2020, 20:03 brusdev ha scritto: > Hi Micheal, > > I think writing this definition in the documentation, could help the > contributors to create

Re: [DISCUSS] Refactor queue creation in Artemis (ARTEMIS-2692)

+100 for me Lovely the reduction in code complexity to favour maintainabiliity: just well done! Il giorno dom 5 apr 2020 alle ore 17:28 Justin Bertram ha scritto: > In theory, creating a queue in Artemis is pretty straightforward. If you're > on a client you can use: > > -

Re: [DISCUSSION] AMQP paging is triggering reencode: it's possible to avoid it?

Maybe we were doing it due to DLA (just guessing) but what you've said makes lot of sense to me... Il gio 19 mar 2020, 19:35 Timothy Bish ha scritto: > On 3/19/20 2:33 PM, Clebert Suconic wrote: > > Can we stop doing that check? > > > > If we are out of memory, we could certainly write non

Re: [DISCUSS] Deprecate colocated configuration in Artemis

+1 having worked on some of those issues I cannot deny this proposal makes a lot of sense to me! Il lun 10 feb 2020, 20:14 Justin Bertram ha scritto: > Artemis currently has the ability to configure both a live and a backup > server in the same JVM. This is referred to as "colocated" brokers. >

Re: [VOTE] Apache ActiveMQ Artemis 2.10.1

+1 well done! Il lun 23 set 2019, 22:26 Clebert Suconic ha scritto: > I would like to propose an Apache ActiveMQ Artemis 2.10.1 Release. > > The release contains bug fixes and improvements as you can see on the > release report: > >

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache NMS 1.8.0 - Release Candidate 6

+1 non binding Il giorno lun 1 lug 2019 alle ore 11:40 Martyn Taylor ha scritto: > +1 (Binding) > > On Sat, Jun 29, 2019 at 4:47 AM Clebert Suconic > > wrote: > > > +1 binding. > > > > On Fri, Jun 28, 2019 at 2:02 PM > > wrote: > > > > > Just realised though whilst its implied as the person

Re: Improve paging performance when there are lots of subscribers

> > which means the offset info is 100 times large compared to the shared > page index cache. I would check with JOL plugin for exact numbers.. I see with it that we would have an increase of 4 bytes for each PagedRefeferenceImpl, totally decrentralized vs a centralized approach (the cache). In

Re: [VOTE] Apache ActiveMQ Artemis 2.8.1

+1 Il ven 17 mag 2019, 09:12 Emmanuel Hugonnet ha scritto: > Hi, > > +1 not binding > > 2.8.1 passed our integration tests in WildFly > > Emmanuel > > On 16/05/2019 17:31, Clebert Suconic wrote: > > I would like to propose an Apache ActiveMQ Artemis 2.8.1 release. > > > > This is a bug fix

Re: [VOTE] Apache ActiveMQ Artemis 2.8.0 [rc2]

+1 Il ven 3 mag 2019, 00:47 Clebert Suconic ha scritto: > I would like to propose an Apache ActiveMQ Artemis 2.8.0 release. > > This is basically a bug fix release, with the addition of the following > feature > > [ARTEMIS-2306] - Support ActiveMQ5 feature JMSXGroupFirstForConsumer > > This

Re: [VOTE] Apache ActiveMQ Artemis 2.8.0

+1 Il sab 27 apr 2019, 16:09 Christopher Shannon < christopher.l.shan...@gmail.com> ha scritto: > +1 > > On Fri, Apr 26, 2019 at 12:18 PM Timothy Bish wrote: > > > On 4/25/19 9:48 PM, Clebert Suconic wrote: > > > I would like to propose an Apache ActiveMQ Artemis 2.8.0 release. > > > > > > This

Re: [ANNOUNCE] Website updated!

Folks thanks! You've done an awesome job! Il ven 5 apr 2019, 12:17 Christopher Shannon < christopher.l.shan...@gmail.com> ha scritto: > Site looks great, thanks to everyone involved who put in the effort to do > the update. > > On Fri, Apr 5, 2019 at 3:07 AM > wrote: > > > This is great effort

Re: Artemis Scalability Thoughts

> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > Performance was similar. As such agreed if there is an impact for another > usecase thats genuine maybe leave it as is. > > > > > Get Outlook for Android > > > > > > > > On Wed, Mar 20, 2019

Re: Artemis Scalability Thoughts

r is very academic and > not a typical real world case. I think we engineer for multiple > consumers/multiple producers and should test with such setup. > > > > > Get Outlook for Android > > > > > > > > On Wed, Mar 20, 2019 at 1:15 PM +0100, "Fran

Re: Artemis Scalability Thoughts

ble benefit to be gained vs just > theoretical benchmarks as it's just going to make things harder to maintain > and mistakes easier to make in the future. > > On Wed, Mar 20, 2019 at 6:51 AM Francesco Nigro > wrote: > > > HI folks, > > > > I'm writing here to

Artemis Scalability Thoughts

HI folks, I'm writing here to share some thoughts related to the Artemis threading model and how it affects broker scalability. Currently (on 2.7.0) we relies on a shared thread pool ie ActiveMQThreadPoolExecutor backed by a LinkedBlockingQueue-ish queue to process tasks. Thanks to the the Actor

Re: [jira] [Commented] (ARTEMIS-2278) Lost Message - Never Delivered - STOMP? Maybe

Not sure if is relevant, but stomp (and mqtt) was wrongly using direct delivery without supporting it ie they could have suffered many races that could cause misbehaviours. This has been recently addresses for the latest release. Il lun 18 mar 2019, 05:49 Justin Bertram (JIRA) ha scritto: > >

Re: [HEADS-UP] ActiveMQ Artemis 2.7.0 release in 1 week

Great! Thanks Clebert Il giorno gio 14 mar 2019 alle ore 14:54 Clebert Suconic < clebert.suco...@gmail.com> ha scritto: > Actually, if I do the release today, the result is due Tuesday! I can do > it! > > On Thu, Mar 14, 2019 at 9:53 AM Clebert Suconic > wrote: > > > > I will do the release

Re: [HEADS-UP] ActiveMQ Artemis 2.7.0 release in 1 week

> working on these tests (I know that because I work with him) > @Francesco Nigro can you do this 2.7.0 release? > > > Thanks a lot > > On Tue, Mar 12, 2019 at 6:37 PM Clebert Suconic > wrote: > > > > I'm closing PRs between today and tomorrow. if everything goes

Re: [VOTE] ActiveMQ Artemis Native 1.0.0

+1 and agree to the comments of Robbie!! Il ven 1 mar 2019, 18:25 Clebert Suconic ha scritto: > I would like to propose an Apache ActiveMQ Artemis Native 1.0.0 release. > > This is a sub component of ActiveMQ Artemis Native, > > Source distribution can be found here: > >

Re: Artemis LibaioContext.c potential memory leak?

I think that Otavio P on a recent PR has raised a similar question. I think that's correct: we need to address a couple of changes to fix cleanup on failures. The reason why they haven't been addressed is that a critical I/O error could mean just JVM shutdown so the process's death would release

Re: [DISCUSS] ActiveMQ Artemis Native as a separated project

a NOTICE should be sent to dev mailing lists" > > In such guideline / rule got voted on then this would obviously would > not need separate vote, as would have a pmc member sponsoring (yourself > clebert) > > > > > > Sent from my Samsung Galaxy smartphone. > >

Re: [DISCUSS] ActiveMQ Artemis Native as a separated project

+100 for this one and I would be pleased to do it, maybe with the help of both Clebert and Otavio (that's quite good with native stuff!) :) Obviously Michael you know that you're more then welcome on it as well eh, I'm just taking the initiative :D Il giorno mer 30 gen 2019 alle ore 17:51

Re: [VOTE] Apache ActiveMQ Artemis 2.6.4

+1 binding Well done guys and thanks Clebert!!! Il giorno lun 21 gen 2019 alle ore 17:25 michael.andre.pearce ha scritto: > Forgot to say, thanks as always to Clebert for running the release > > > Sent from my Samsung Galaxy smartphone. > Original message From:

Re: Website

Guys, that's a nice work Well done!!! Il mar 2 ott 2018, 17:32 Clebert Suconic ha scritto: > I like this a lot... > > The projects on the front. modern look & feel, Even if you open it on > the phone.. it formats well on cellphones .. which is a nice thing > these days. > > > Big +1 from me

Re: [VOTE] Apache ActiveMQ Artemis 2.6.3

+1 Il mer 5 set 2018, 18:03 Martyn Taylor ha scritto: > +1. > > On Fri, Aug 31, 2018 at 6:08 PM, Christopher Shannon < > christopher.l.shan...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > +1 > > > > On Fri, Aug 31, 2018 at 11:11 AM Timothy Bish > wrote: > > > > > On 08/30/2018 10:46 PM, Clebert Suconic wrote: > >

Re: [VOTE] Apache ActiveMQ Artemis 2.6.1 (3rd respin)

+1 *built and run some tests Il giorno mer 6 giu 2018 alle ore 16:45 Timothy Bish ha scritto: > On 06/04/2018 08:35 PM, Clebert Suconic wrote: > > I would like to propose an Apache ActiveMQ Artemis 2.6.1 release. This > > is the 3rd Respin and I have fixed the previous issues encountered. > >

Re: [DISCUSS] Commits report

Nice!!! Il giorno gio 17 mag 2018 alle ore 10:55 Benjamin Graf < benjamin.g...@gmx.net> ha scritto: > Hi Clebert, > > this really gives a good overview what happened! > > big +1 > > Regards > Benjamin > > > Gesendet: Donnerstag, 17. Mai 2018 um 04:52 Uhr > Von: "Clebert Suconic"

Re: [VOTE] Apache ActiveMQ Artemis 2.6.0

+1 for me as well! Il giorno gio 17 mag 2018 alle ore 07:01 Howard Gao ha scritto: > +1 > > On Thu, May 17, 2018 at 10:49 AM, Clebert Suconic < > clebert.suco...@gmail.com > > wrote: > > > I would like to propose an Apache ActiveMQ Artemis 2.6.0 release. > > > > The

Re: [DISCUSS] Reopening Pull Requests..

Great, Clebert! That's very useful: I have found sometimes my closed PRs unable to be reopened...that's why. Thanks!! Il giorno mar 17 apr 2018 alle ore 16:13 Clebert Suconic < clebert.suco...@gmail.com> ha scritto: > If you close your pull request, you may reopen it if you keep the same > git

Re: [VOTE] Apache ActiveMQ Artemis 2.5.0

+1 Compiled and run some tests on it Il giorno mer 14 mar 2018 alle ore 10:46 Dejan Bosanac ha scritto: > +1 > > Regards > -- > Dejan Bosanac > http://sensatic.net/about > > On Wed, Mar 14, 2018 at 12:25 AM, Christopher Shannon < > christopher.l.shan...@gmail.com> wrote:

Re: ActiveMQ real time and protocol performance tests

Hi! Considering that I'm talking about soft-real time (is people do not die if too slow) please take a look to Artemis (with core protocol) too! Cheers, Franz Il ven 19 gen 2018, 21:29 kai ha scritto: > Hello together, > > if have found this article to ActiveMQ

Re: [DISCUSS] Video call on ActiveMQ Artemis

+1 I've had something similar with Clebert in the past and it was very useful indeed! Thanks Clebert for this great idea and I agree with Michael that probably I will follow it in the evening too :) Cheers, Franz Il giorno ven 8 dic 2017 alle ore 02:04 Christopher Shannon <

Re: [VOTE] ActiveMQ Artemis becomes ActiveMQ 6

+1 (non-binding) Il giorno mar 5 dic 2017 alle ore 04:17 Francois Papon < francois.pa...@openobject.fr> ha scritto: > +1 (non-binding) > > Francois > > > Le 05/12/2017 à 00:32, Clebert Suconic a écrit : > > Following on from the discussion, "[DISCUSS] Confusion surrounding the > > ActiveMQ

Re: [ANNOUNCE] Welcome Michael Andre Pearce as an Apache ActiveMQ Committer

Great job and well deserved Michael Il giorno lun 2 ott 2017 alle ore 15:37 Clebert Suconic < clebert.suco...@gmail.com> ha scritto: > On behalf of the Apache ActiveMQ PMC, I am very pleased to announce > that Michael Andre Pearce has accepted an invitation to become a > committer. We

Re: [DISCUSS] Artemis IOPS Limiter strategy

. > > > > We may need to eventually add more threads to poll. > > > > But the good thing on aio is using less CPU. > > > > > > > >> On Fri, May 12, 2017 at 5:25 PM Francesco Nigro <[hidden email] > <http:///user/SendEmail.jtp?type=node

Re: [DISCUSS] Artemis IOPS Limiter strategy

And the most weird thing is that I'm having better results with NIO then ASYNCIO (with small sized messages) and I'm not getting why Time to go, 'm off; in Italy is 23:30 now..have fun guys and thanks: always great stuff :) 2017-05-12 23:02 GMT+02:00 nigro_franz : >

Re: [VOTE] Apache ActiveMQ CLI Tools 0.10 #2

+1 great work!!! Il mer 3 mag 2017, 22:21 Clebert Suconic ha scritto: > +1 (+1000... nice one!) > > > > On Wed, May 3, 2017 at 3:46 PM, Timothy Bish wrote: > > +1 > > > > * Validate LICENSE and NOTICE files are in both archives > > * Built from

Re: [DISCUSS] removing aerogear / vertx module

Good idea! Il ven 28 ott 2016, 15:37 Robbie Gemmell ha scritto: > On 28 October 2016 at 05:56, Clebert Suconic > wrote: > > There are a few modules on Artemis that I feel are a bit defunct. I > > don't really think anyone will be using it: >