Re: Active Durable Subscriber status automatically changing to offline Durable Subscriber [5.14.1 Most Stable Version]

When this happens with your real-world server (in the morning or the middle of the night), are you experiencing network partitions that result in the subscriber really truly being offline for some period of time? If so, you completely left that out of your initial description, and it means that

Re: Transport failed, attempting to automatically reconnect due to: java.io.EOFException

Details of the inactivity monitor are at http://activemq.apache.org/activemq-inactivitymonitor.html. It's on by default, so if you haven't modified any settings related to it, it should be working correctly. An EOFException typically means that something closed the TCP connection. Often it's the

Re: Active Durable Subscriber status automatically changing to offline Durable Subscriber [5.14.1 Most Stable Version]

Hi, Thank you for your response. I did all setup and tested. 1] First I tested with 5.14.5 . I started active mq server on laptop L1. 2] I started application on laptop L2 . Both laptops are in same network 3] So connection established, and I found my 2 [ SUB1 and SUB2 ] subscribers active. 4]

Re: Active MQ - Performance with CLIENT Ack

Is your workflow process-ack-process-ack-process-ack (one message at a time immediately followed by acking that one message, in a single thread)? If so, I'd expect your processing to be slower than if you only acknowledge every Nth message, though I'm not sure how significant of a performance

Re: Active MQ - Master/Slave Config Not working

Is the shared drive using a filesystem where distributed exclusive locks work correctly and reliably? NFSv4 is safe, NFSv3 isn't, and some others work while others don't. http://activemq.apache.org/shared-file-system-master-slave.html has some details, though it's hardly an exhaustive list of all

Re: Active MQ - runtimeConfigurationPlugin - Set Message Priority - Not working

I finally got some time to dig into the code, and discovered that the PolicyEntry.update() and PolicyEntry.baseUpdate() methods (

Re: Transport failed, attempting to automatically reconnect due to: java.io.EOFException

I have not configured any inactivity monitoring. How can I check if any exists by default? -- View this message in context: http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/Transport-failed-attempting-to-automatically-reconnect-due-to-java-io-EOFException-tp2351687p4728568.html Sent from the ActiveMQ -

Re: Active MQ - Master/Slave Config Not working

Hi Tim, The paths configured for Kaha DB and data in broker attributes are same for both instances - pointing to the same folder on the shared drive. Anything else needs to be changed/added? Thanks Anil -- View this message in context:

Re: Active MQ - Performance with CLIENT Ack

We are testing it from Tibco Business Works. We configured the JMS Connection using JNDI. With auto acknowledged we did not see any issues. Everything worked fine. We are testing queues. Topics are also in scope for the testing, have not started yet. I did not configure prefetch, using the

Re: Active MQ - runtimeConfigurationPlugin - Set Message Priority - Not working

Sorry, Tim. I miss understood your previous question. If I restart with the policy configured, the property is getting applied and it is working as expected. It is only not happening if I try to have it updated at runtime. -- View this message in context:

Re: [ActiveMQ 6.0] Will ActiveMQ 6.0 will be released on Artemis codebase?

Yes Artemis is being actively developed and is the primary focus while the old ActiveMQ 5.x line is mostly just maintenance mode at this point. The intention is that Artemis is the successor regardless of whether it keeps the name Artemis or is renamed at some point. In my opinion if you are

Re: [ActiveMQ 6.0] Will ActiveMQ 6.0 will be released on Artemis codebase?

...there's a lot of activity on Artemis with new code and features added each day. On Fri, Jul 14, 2017 at 3:20 AM, kkott00 wrote: > As it have been reported before here > Artemis become > successor of ActiveMQ line. Is

[ActiveMQ 6.0] Will ActiveMQ 6.0 will be released on Artemis codebase?

As it have been reported before here Artemis become successor of ActiveMQ line. Is it still actual? Is there migration plan expected? Should I prefer Artemis for new projects than ActiveMQ? -- View this message in context:

Re: Transport failed, attempting to automatically reconnect due to: java.io.EOFException

Are you using the inactivity monitor on the connection? On Jul 14, 2017 2:54 AM, "akpuvvada" wrote: > We are also facing the same issue. > I have two Active MQ Brokers on different machine configured as configured > as Master/Slave using shared store. > We are suing the

Re: Active MQ - Master/Slave Config Not working

By default, the failover transport attempts to connect to the child URIs in order. That doesn't mean it considers the first one to be the master, just that it tries the first one first. When the client doesn't attempt to connect to the secondary broker, that means it's successfully connecting to

Re: Active MQ - Performance with CLIENT Ack

1MB payloads are pretty big. I'm not sure that is affecting the behavior you're seeing, but it stands out as unusual. Since you say the messages are not being acked, can you show us the code that attempts to send those acks? And are we talking about queues or topics? Are the performance

Re: Active MQ - runtimeConfigurationPlugin - Set Message Priority - Not working

To make sure I'm understanding your answer: when you *restart* the broker, you see a log line saying that the broker applied your configuration, but it doesn't have the desired effect. Is that what you're saying? On Jul 14, 2017 5:07 AM, "akpuvvada" wrote: > No, Tim. > I

Active MQ - Performance with CLIENT Ack

I am trying to test Active MQ for Performance I have installed it in Unix in 'Shared File System' Fault Tolerant pair. Max Heap Size is 3 GB 4GB Persistence Store Size 2Gb Temporary Store Size I am trying to publish messages with 'Non_Persistent' Delivery mode with Payload of size 1 MB without

Active MQ - Master/Slave Config Not working

I observed an issue with the Fault Tolerance configuration: When the primary/master is down, clients are not able to reconnect to the secondary on retry; it is throwing a warning and trying to reconnect. Also, it is considering the first URL as Master and first trying to connect to and fall back

Re: Active MQ - runtimeConfigurationPlugin - Set Message Priority - Not working

No, Tim. I can see an update in the log that the configuration is updated, however the policy is not getting applied. When seen in JConsole, the detestation property is not showing as set. Thanks Anil -- View this message in context:

Re: Transport failed, attempting to automatically reconnect due to: java.io.EOFException

We are also facing the same issue. I have two Active MQ Brokers on different machine configured as configured as Master/Slave using shared store. We are suing the current release version. Transport (tcp://localhost:61616) failed , attempting to automatically reconnect: java.io.EOFException