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 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 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 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 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 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.
---
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
+1
Thanks for doing the release, Chrsitopher.
--
Sent from: http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/ActiveMQ-Dev-f2368404.html
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 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 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 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 RoddieKieley closed the pull request at:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/2201
---
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 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 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 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/2200
---
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 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 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 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 asfgit closed the pull request at:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/2195
---
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/2197
---
Github user clebertsuconic commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/2197
bringing this into 2.6.x
---
Github user asfgit closed the pull request at:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/2191
---
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/2204
---
Github user asfgit closed the pull request at:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/2196
---
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 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,
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 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 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
pulled it into 2.6.x
---
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
@franz1981 so are you adding a test?
---
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
Github user graben commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/2193
@clebertsuconic : Friendly reminder :-)
---
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 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
+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 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 :)
---
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 asfgit closed the pull request at:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/2198
---
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 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 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 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/2203
@franz1981 please watch the examples. On my private CI an example failed on
your branch.
---
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 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 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 gaohoward commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/2205
ah sorry about that. I'm closing it.
---
Github user michaelandrepearce commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/commit/a2da41ee2e347bcf8fe721bded89e4a78ca14cfb#commitcomment-29899636
In
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 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 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:
64 matches
Mail list logo
