Re: A configured queuePrefetch of one in ActiveMQ 5.14.1 with AMQP 1.0 behaves like a queuePrefetch of two.

On 12/07/2016 05:09 PM, Patrick Vansevenant wrote: I have opened JIRA https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AMQ-6530. I will certainly try ActiveMQ 5.14.2 at the moment it is released ! -- View this message in context:

Re: A configured queuePrefetch of one in ActiveMQ 5.14.1 with AMQP 1.0 behaves like a queuePrefetch of two.

I have opened JIRA https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AMQ-6530. I will certainly try ActiveMQ 5.14.2 at the moment it is released ! -- View this message in context:

Re: Regarding replicated DB store solutions

You probably figured this out but to be clear in my previous message in the first paragraph I meant to say that LevelDB was "intended to be the follow on to KahaDB", and not "was intended to be the follow on to ActiveMQ" as it currently states. On Wed, Dec 7, 2016 at 3:26 PM, Christopher Shannon

Re: Regarding replicated DB store solutions

The issue with the current LevelDB implementation is that it is not stable. There have been numerous bugs reported against it that have not been fixed including corruption problems so it is not really usable in a production environment. Originally it was intended to be the follow on to ActiveMQ

Re: Configuring destination memory usage with wild cards

Thanks for the response. They are visible via JMX and that's why I assumed that was the case. I just wanted confirmation. Has there been any though given to making those memory limits configurable as megabytes? It would be more human friendly, and easier to calculate with regard to the

Re: Configuring destination memory usage with wild cards

I think the limits are visible via JMX (it's been a while and I'm going on memory because I'm not currently able to check, so I might be wrong), and if so that would be a way to test this if you still wanted one. On Dec 7, 2016 6:58 AM, "Tim Bain" wrote: > The limits are

Re: Configuring destination memory usage with wild cards

The limits are applied to each destination that matches the pattern. On Dec 6, 2016 10:15 AM, "rth" wrote: > If you configure memory usage with a policyEntry using a wildcard, does > each > destination that matches get that much memory? > > For instance, if I have this

Re: Configuring peer transport with shared data directory

ActiveMQ doesn't provide a way to have replication of messages between active brokers. We provide high availability (i.e. the ability to not lose the messages in a broker that crashes) via master/slave pairs where only one broker is active at a time and they use (for KahaDB) a shared filesystem