The use case you are trying to achieve is probably best done by using a
transaction instead of individual acknowledgements. If you call rollback
on the session then the message would be available to be redelivered to
another consumer.
On Tue, Jun 9, 2015 at 3:50 AM, spamtrap
I think the only way you are going to be able to achieve what you want is
by doing what Tim mentionedusing a transaction where you
commit/rollback after each message. Since processing a message could take
a while, you could increase the number of consumers to increase throughput.
Take a
Thank you very much christopher.l.shannon.
Your reply helped me to solve the problem.
This is the new code (the modifications are in bold) for any one who may be
interested. Your critics are welcomed of course.
Regards,
public class MyBroker extends BrokerFilter {
public MyBroker(Broker
Hello,
I am working on integrating an AMQP 1.0 client with the Apache Apollo
server. I am able to send and receive messages up to a certain size (around
16k). After that, the contents of the message will come up as null on the
receiving end. I was able to send/receive these messages with another
I'm glad that helped. At a quick glance your new code looks pretty good.
The important thing was being able to only send the message to the next
broker so that your broker filter doesn't get called in an infinite loop
and your new code does this. Your new code is also much more efficient
than
Does this happens reliably and quickly for you? Can you force it to happen
by taking a certain series of actions?
On Jun 8, 2015 11:45 PM, ALi osat...@gmail.com wrote:
It is 5.8.0. As it was working ok we didn't want to update it. The new
version 5.10 had problems with stomp and websocket. We
Hi all,
first, thanks for the release of v1.0.0 of Artemis!
I'm currently experimenting with the use of message groups to quickly
distribute messages to workers while keeping order on items belonging
together. In order to avoid artificial grouping/sharding it would be perfect
for my use case if
On Tue, 9 Jun 2015 07:29:16 -0600, Tim Bain
tb...@alumni.duke.edu wrote:
So why can't you use transactions? Won't you get what you want if you
commit the transaction after every successful message and
rollback()/close() and then reconnect after every failed one?
No. It may take some time to
On Mon, Jun 8, 2015 at 9:43 AM, Kevin Burton bur...@spinn3r.com wrote:
Advisories break when using the memory store. A warning that a null
pointer
exception was caught goes to the log but the advisories aren’t raised.
OK, thanks for sharing. Have you created a bug report for it? If
So why can't you use transactions? Won't you get what you want if you
commit the transaction after every successful message and
rollback()/close() and then reconnect after every failed one?
Also is the app server going to fail to respond to *certain* messages, or
is it going to fail to respond
Can you put a breakpoint on the call to socket.close() in
TcpTransport.doStop() (
http://grepcode.com/file/repo1.maven.org/maven2/org.apache.activemq/activemq-client/5.11.1/org/apache/activemq/transport/tcp/TcpTransport.java#TcpTransport.doStop%28org.apache.activemq.util.ServiceStopper%29)
and see
11 matches
Mail list logo
