Yeah there are lots of interesting subtleties with this sort of thing :-)
I've got a bit of a mantra on my project handle edge cases at the
edges so my core is very simple with federated C++ brokers run on
boxes with lots of memory running nothing but C++ qpid brokers.
Which is why I've been
Thanks Rob.
I really need to have a play with the Java broker some time - I do like the C++
broker though :-)
Re
Having spent the best part of an afternoon just trying to get the C++
broker and store to build on my Ubuntu 11.10 machine... that is certainly a
huge convenience :-)
I don't
Hi there,
It looks to me like your address syntax is wrong.
A destination that I tend to use for playing around with the headers
exchange is:
testqueue; {create: receiver, node: {x-declare: {arguments:
{'qpid.policy_type': ring, 'qpid.max_size': 5}}, x-bindings:
[{exchange:
that
it just works?
Am 02.01.2012 21:38, schrieb Fraser Adams:
I *think I've cracked this..
I built everything fresh and added the patches fresh and make install
seemed to then work. I was a bit baffled then realised my shell had
some environment variables set.
My suspicion is that I needed
Thanks for the me too Kalle. I was beginning to wonder if it was just me.
Out of curiosity did you try the patch that I submitted in the Jira
associated with this thread?
As well as link errors I also got compilation errors (really promoted
warnings) about unused return types, so I also
Hi Pavel,
I *think* that they are the same thing.
With C++ I've only used qpid::messaging and that *definitely* has a
default consumer capacity of 1 and I think a default producer capacity
of 50, so if you write a qpid::messaging consumer by default its
performance won't be great hence it's
Hi Pavel,
Sorry I can't be any more help. Given what I said previously based on my
casual rummage through the source code my bet is that configuring the
producer capacity simply isn't supported on the Java client run time. My
comment below about
Hmmm scratch that.. I'm typing this as I'm
Hi all,
I've got a scenario where I have a consumer who for various reasons
can't connect directly to my AMQP infrastructure.
I want to be able to share messages with them in a fairly lightweight
and hopefully standards based manner. Some of the metadata contained in
the AMQP headers we've
Hi Sindura,
The way to do it programatically is to use QMF (the Qpid Management
Framework). It's not too complicated, but unfortunately it's not trivial
either. Apologies for the long response, but I hope it's enough to get
you started.
There's definitely enough information here, so the exam
Hi Sergey,
Gordon Sim was I think going to put a small patch to qpid-config for
qpid 0.14 I don't know if he did though as I've not had time to play
with 0.14
To tide you over I've attached a patched version of qpid-config based on
the 0.8 version of qpid-config
do
./qpid-config-patched
Hi all,
I've had cause to write a tool to log connection information so I
thought I'd share it.
It's nothing special, it recovers all of the QMF connection objects and
logs some of the more useful properties.
It also figures out the sessions associated with each connection and
Hello all
I'm working on a bit of a project where I'm writing a REST interface
around QMF2 and Qpid messaging and using that as back end for a web
application. I think it's quite cool, though don't get too excited as
it's quite early days and too hacky for me to be happy to share yet,
though
On 10/02/12 22:15, Gordon Sim wrote:
Actually the 0.6, 0.8 and even trunk versions currently use
Broker.connect() and Link.bridge() methods. Using the Broker.create()
would be cleaner and more uniform and I would imagine that will be
done at some point.
I was fairly sure about the
This might be a slightly weird question, but what does making an
exchange persistent actually do?
What I mean is that one of the behaviours that I'd really like with Qpid
is to be able to have *configuration* persisted.
With queues if I make the queue durable then I end up with queue
queues.
Frase
On 13/02/12 06:57, Zhemzhitsky Sergey wrote:
Hi Fraser,
It works amazing. Thanks a lot.
Best Regards,
Sergey Zhemzhitsky
-Original Message-
From: Fraser Adams [mailto:fraser.ad...@blueyonder.co.uk]
Sent: Friday, February 10, 2012 5:41 PM
To: users@qpid.apache.org
Subject: Re
Hi Sinduja,
You didn't say which language you needed to write your agent in, I think
from your previous posts it most likely C++?
I think that the link that Ted gave you is probably the best one to get
you started with QMF in C++.
IMHO the layout in the source tree of QMF stuff is something
into the next
qpid release?
Best Regards,
Sergey
-Original Message-
From: Fraser Adams [mailto:fraser.ad...@blueyonder.co.uk]
Sent: Tuesday, February 14, 2012 12:45 AM
To: users@qpid.apache.org
Subject: Re: Headers exchange binding
No Probs Sergey, happy I could help. I can't take any
, 2012 at 3:27 PM, Fraser Adams
fraser.ad...@blueyonder.co.uk wrote:
Hi Sinduja,
You didn't say which language you needed to write your agent in, I think
from your previous posts it most likely C++?
I think that the link that Ted gave you is probably the best one to get
you started with QMF in C
to drop periodically out and
auto-reconnect.
Frase
On 01/03/12 15:04, Gordon Sim wrote:
On 02/29/2012 07:07 PM, Fraser Adams wrote:
Hi All,
I think that we may have stumbled across a potential memory/resource
leak.
We have one particular set up where we have a C++ producer client (using
, Gordon Sim wrote:
On 02/29/2012 07:07 PM, Fraser Adams wrote:
Hi All,
I think that we may have stumbled across a potential memory/resource
leak.
We have one particular set up where we have a C++ producer client (using
qpid::client - don't ask, it's a long story.) this writes to a 0.8
broker
On 09/03/12 14:22, Gordon Sim wrote:
Can you (or have you) tracked the queue depth, connection and session
stats for the broker exhibiting the problem? Anything you can think of
that might correlate with the rate of growth (e.g. does it look like
its per message)?
Unfortunately nothing
Just btw, you can mark the queue as durable without making the message
persistent, in which case there would be no performance penalty.
Thanks, yeah I realise that, but you have to explicitly mark the
messages as not persistent, certainly for JMS the spec says that should
be the default and I
Hi Davide
What language are you interested in?
I'm afraid QMF is still a bit disjoint you might be aware that there are
two variants:
QMF1 which uses a compact binary protocol and the QMF1 API - that's what
the bundled qpid tools such as qpid-config, qpid-stat etc. use. That has
good python
in the right direction? Does this make sense to you?
Best,
Davide
-Original Message-
From: Fraser Adams [mailto:fraser.ad...@blueyonder.co.uk]
Sent: 16 March 2012 16:49
To: users@qpid.apache.org
Subject: Re: QMF Tutorial
Hi Davide
What language are you interested in?
I'm afraid QMF is still
everybody,
Davide
-Original Message-
From: Fraser Adams [mailto:fraser.ad...@blueyonder.co.uk]
Sent: 16 March 2012 18:33
To: users@qpid.apache.org
Subject: Re: QMF Tutorial
Hi Davide,
I'm afraid that I don't quite understand what you're trying to achieve -
you might have to spell it out :-(
One
Hi Pavel/Jakub/Rajith
I posted ages back (March 2011) that I didn't believe that JMS Message
Selectors were behaving correctly:
http://qpid.2158936.n2.nabble.com/JMS-Message-Selectors-Behaving-Strangely-td6158445.html
My observations concur with the observations of Pavel and Jakob namely
I'd
Hi Sumi,
I think that you may have misinterpreted what that thread was about, it
didn't actually have anything to do with request/response at all (not
sure how you inferred that really) anyway that thread related to qpid
federation. You can federate between two brokers using a number of
Richard's issue does seem weird.
I note that he's using source routes, given his comment.
qpid-config -s queue add DESTINATION SOURCE amq.match queue_name
I'm not at all clear how qpid/amqp behaves through a hardware load
balancer. I did wonder if there might be an issue whereby the
Hi Guys,
I'm joining this thread a little late.
Options using browsers with a separate queue to remove messages aught to
work well.
Another option would be to use QMF to remove messages the QMF queue
management object has a purge method that can remove messages from a
queue, though
I suppose as this point I'd start asking some philosophical questions.
In general pub/sub is a fire and forget model and is most commonly used
when you want to decouple producers and consumers, what you are talking
about is essentially introducing a level of coupling between producers
and
On 02/05/12 19:54, m.luc...@smartasking.com wrote:
, but even so I would be wary of implementing features that are not supported.
That's an interesting discussion/debate :-) I think Gordon Sim and I
disagree on this one and he's more of the expert than I, however when we
last discussed this
Hi all,
I'm looking through a bunch of QMF2 object properties and statistics and
things don't seem to add up (all qpid 0.12)
I've stood up two brokers and have created a source queue route between
them
qpid-config add queue federate --limit-policy=ring
qpid-config bind amq.match
Hi All,
on one of our brokers my colleagues have started seeing errors of the form:
error could not accept socket: Transport endpoint is not connected
(qpid/sys/posix/Socket.cpp 58)
Does anybody have a good idea what is likely to be causing this??
The broker appears to be functioning and
Hi Guys,
I think that's a fair point, though to be fair the approach Alex
suggested is really just an instance of a message bridge, which is a
standard Integration Pattern. It's clearly not ideal but ultimately you
have an integration problem to solve. We've had similar scenarios
bridging
java to
rabbitmq client.
But. The way we would like to achieve - is to keep qpid c++ performance. So, we
are going to investigate it.
Regards,
Boris
-Original Message-
From: Fraser Adams [mailto:fraser.ad...@blueyonder.co.uk]
Sent: Friday, May 25, 2012 11:20 AM
To: users@qpid.apache.org
Hi all,
we appear to be seeing some fairly large numbers of message duplicates,
we've had a few other issues that have caused us to be more observant of
what's passing through the system so we're not sure if this is recent of
we've simply not noticed before.
We've got quite a heavily
was happy to release :-(
On 29/05/12 23:17, Fraser Adams wrote:
Hi all,
we appear to be seeing some fairly large numbers of message
duplicates, we've had a few other issues that have caused us to be
more observant of what's passing through the system so we're not sure
if this is recent of we've
(any broker anywhere in the network) without
introducing looping. Some examples here would be useful, clearly I'm
missing something.
Cheers,
Frase
On 06/05/12 11:37, Fraser Adams wrote:
Hi all,
I'm looking through a bunch of QMF2 object properties and statistics
and things don't seem to add
Hi all,
I'm running qpid c++ broker 0.12 and I've started seeing:
error Execution exception: not-found: Unknown destination 9
(qpid/broker/SemanticState.cpp:563)
To be honest I've usually got the broker running fairly constantly but
of late I've been doing testing that has needed a lot of
Hi Richard/Rajith
I don't know if this is related to what you are seeing, but I posted a
few weeks ago in a post entitled
error Execution exception: not-found: Unknown destination 9
(qpid/broker/SemanticState.cpp:563)
I'm running qpid c++ broker 0.12 and I've started seeing:
error
-To: users@qpid.apache.org
Organisation: Red Hat UK Ltd, Registered in England and Wales under
Company Registration No. 3798903, Directors: Michael Cunningham (USA),
Mark Hegarty (Ireland), Matt Parsons (USA), Charlie Peters (USA)
To: users@qpid.apache.org
On 02/29/2012 07:07 PM, Fraser Adams
Thanks for the quick response Gordon!
For a reliable receiver, the broker needs to keep track of all
unacknowledged messages. That will include all prefetched messages
(depending on the frequency at which acknowledgements are actually
sent it may include fetched messages also of course).
We
On 03/08/12 13:56, Gordon Sim wrote:
On 08/03/2012 01:55 PM, Gordon Sim wrote:
On 08/03/2012 01:35 PM, Fraser Adams wrote:
subscription = subscriptions.subscribe(*this, queue);
subscription.setFlowControl(FlowControl::messageWindow(100)); // Why
doesn't this work
subscription = subscriptions.subscribe(*this, queue,
SubscriptionSettings(FlowControl::messageWindow(100),
ACCEPT_MODE_NONE));
Unfortunately that setting just seemed to cause my consumer to hang
after getting the first 100 messages.
subscription = subscriptions.subscribe(*this,
If I can get evidence to suggest that the federation unreliable links
behaviour isn't as effective at mitigating this in 0.8 as it is in later
brokers that would be useful, as I say I keep arguing that we should be
upgrading to something newer.
I've had a scan through the svn logs and I don't
I guess that a key point to have in the back of ones mind is that the
JMS Concepts of topic and queue are really mappings on to AMQP in Qpid.
By that I mean in AMQP there are concepts of exchanges, queues and
bindings between the exchange and queue - and consumers *always* receive
their
Hi Yannan
I wrote a pretty complete Java Implementation of the QMF2 API which you
can get from the Jira 3675 linked here.
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/QPID-3675
I've got absolutely no idea if this has made it into Qpid proper, it's
marked down as assigned to Ted Ross.
Hello,
I'm currently implementing a QMF2 REST API and whilst working on the
mechanism to invoke QMF2 methods I started messing around on some soak
tests where I did a POST specifying a given QMF2 Object, which then does
an invokeMethod on the QmfConsoleData on the REST Server.
What I noticed
Hi Rajesh,
I'm currently working on one!
My UI is a Web based application that uses a REST API back end that I'm
also writing. It's fairly fancy as I'm adding features so that it can
add/delete queues/exchanges/bindings etc. via a REST proxy to QMF2
method invocations.
It's put together
I couldn't say for sure, but I'm fairly sure that it's written in python
and I *think* it uses postgesql database which are both open source so
it could probably be *made* to work in Windows 7
however...
When I played with Cumin (which was ~ 1 year ago) it was fairly clear
that it was
I can confirm that x-bindings is very definitely available in
qpid::messaging in qpid 0.8. We used headers exchange with 0.8 for ages
before (finally) upgrading to 0.18.
Do definitely go with a later version, no really do!!!, seriously :-)
There are a whole raft of improvements and bug fixes
Hello all,
I've been testing out the add binding functionality on the Qpid UI I've
been writing and came across some exciting broker behaviour :-)
In précis I was fairly randomly adding and deleting bindings, which
ultimately result in QMF create/delete calls with type of binding.
Eventually
Hi Guys,
just my 2p worth, but I have to say I'm not at all convinced by any of this.
I personally don't see what's wrong with the standard model for the
request/response pattern of requiring a reply-to address and an optional
correlation ID.
A key point here is that this is and has been for
Thanks for the update Ken.
but since the problem is rarely hit clearly we're not adding enough
bindings :-) I'll soon change that :-D
I'll probably add some defensive code in my GUI. It's a little bit of a
faff to do but I've already got a cache of Binding, Queue and Exchange
QMF objects,
On 03/01/13 19:18, Ken Giusti wrote:
Hi Fraser,
I think the fix for this bug is to prevent the headers exchange from allowing
multiple bindings with the same keys.
In that case, when entering the following commands:
qpid-config bind amq.match test f1 all k1=v1
qpid-config bind amq.match test
Howdy Lance,
You mention qpid-tool which uses QMF so I'm assuming that you are
talking about the C++ broker. The Java broker uses JMX and I'm not so
familiar with how that does instrumentation so the following is only
really applicable to the C++ broker.
Unfortunately QMF can be a bit
give the answer you'd like,
Frase
Thanks again,
-Lance
On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 5:44 AM, Fraser Adams fraser.ad...@blueyonder.co.uk
wrote:
Howdy Lance,
You mention qpid-tool which uses QMF so I'm assuming that you are talking
about the C++ broker. The Java broker uses JMX and I'm not so familiar
Yes, with AMQP 0-10, the only time a producer indicates the destination of the
message is when it actually sends the message. The message.transfer command
includes the destination of the message, which is an exchange. A producer may
send to various exchanges, simply by changing the destination
weekend folks!
-Lance
On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 12:39 PM, Fraser Adams
fraser.ad...@blueyonder.co.uk wrote:
Yes, with AMQP 0-10, the only time a producer indicates the destination of
the message is when it actually sends the message. The message.transfer
command includes the destination
QMF queueMoveMessages method returns InvalidParameter exception when
there are simply no messages available to move from the source queue -
this is confusing.
Other queue management commands (such as purge and reroute on the queue
object) don't object when there are no messages to move but
Hi All
I've just noticed this during some testing of my QMF REST API, so I've
been going a getObjects call with an ObjectId as a parameter which
should return the most recent state of that object.
More precisely I first did getObjects(broker) to retrieve the broker
objects and having got the
I totally agree with this view Gordon, I guess that's obvious as I
suspect your post was at least partly precipitated by my comments on
proton and how it relates to qpid.
I think that your comment about subject line filtering is a fair one and
agree about the Jira commit notices comment but I
over :-) but hopefully it ties in with what I've also been
saying about proton.
Thanks again for the update!!
Cheers,
Frase
On 18/01/13 16:51, Gordon Sim wrote:
On 01/04/2013 10:07 AM, Fraser Adams wrote:
I really haven't seen an awful lot of publicity around proton and how it
relates
Hi Bruno/Gordon,
Thanks for the initial feedback. Gordon it's slightly worrying your
comment The problem seems to stem from using the qpid jars from trunk
(or indeed it seems from 0.20 rc4). Unfortunately to date I've only had
a chance to run it against qpidd 0.12 because as I've mentioned
{
return null;
}
}
On 22/01/13 20:28, Gordon Sim wrote:
On 01/22/2013 07:15 PM, Fraser Adams wrote:
From the post below Gordon it sounds like you've now got it up and
running. It's a shame that it didn't just work for you as I'd hoped.
If there's any specific gotchas that you came
On 23/01/13 10:41, Bruno Matos wrote:
Hi Fraser,
I have configured logs, and I will point some 'issues' that I found.
Sometimes I can see events, but not queues or exchanges. After waiting
for a while (sometimes I let it run an came back 1 ou 2 minutes later)
and it's all populated.
That's
It's a little embarrassing 'cause I've kind of been using these for a
couple of years, but as they are ever so slightly obtuse :- I've
generally been lazy/pragmatic and did copy'n'paste of things that have
worked.
Because of the various URL differences (the ones used by the python
tools,
in Java client disallowing no credentials option, see
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/QPID-3396.
Kind regards,
Pavel
- Original Message -
From: Fraser Adams fraser.ad...@blueyonder.co.uk
To: users@qpid.apache.org
Sent: Friday, January 25, 2013 11:07:29 AM
Subject: Could somebody
Gripes so far.. I'm afraid it looks like 0.20 has broken QMF on Java.
I've built the main qpid-all.jar and pointed my CLASSPATH at it and
unfortunately fings is well broke, innit? :-(
It's lower level than the GUI stuff as none of the QMF2 stuff is working
and my QpidConfig port reports
Another thing I've just noticed about 0.20 Java.
The behaviour of the Thread that gets started when a MessageListener is
registered has changed some time between 0.12 and 0.20 (I'm afraid I was
stuck on 0.12 for a while so I can't say exactly which version it got
changed in).
In 0.12 it
of the options in
general.
Thanks again for responding so fast Rob,
Frase
On 26/01/13 12:10, Rob Godfrey wrote:
On 26 January 2013 13:00, Fraser Adams fraser.ad...@blueyonder.co.uk wrote:
Another thing I've just noticed about 0.20 Java.
The behaviour of the Thread that gets started when
afraid I was just trying to keep focus on my
GUI. A flawed decision on my part as it turns out :-D
I'll keep you posted.
Frase
On 26/01/13 11:32, Fraser Adams wrote:
Gripes so far.. I'm afraid it looks like 0.20 has broken QMF on Java.
I've built the main qpid-all.jar and pointed my CLASSPATH
Hello all,
I could have *sworn* I'd seen some postings some time back relating to
getting and setting the Content-Type.
Now I can get the type by down casting Message to the Qpid
AbstractJMSMessage e.g.
String contentType =
Hello,
what's the objective that you are trying to achieve?
Do you mean that you want a producer client to be able to work out the
source port the connection is using, or given a producer client, a
broker and a consumer client you want to figure out from the broker say
what the source port is
I've just released an update to:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/QPID-3675
Those of you following my recent posts over the weekend will have
noticed that changes made in Qpid 0.20 Java Client runtime caused the
Java QMF2 Implementation to break and thus the Qpid GUI.
These changes
Hi Bruno,
Yes that's exactly what I thought was happening too.
Please do take a look at some of the other posts I've made to the
mailing list over the last few days.
I made a post entitled Could somebody *please* explain Java Connection
URLs to which Pavel Moravec kindly replied:
Hi
There isn't a way to do this as yet, it it's something that I had in the
back of my mind.
I'm a little torn, so there's a couple of approaches and they both have
merits. At the moment there's a -a option to specify a default broker
and there's a mechanism to add connections on the GUI.
One
consistent model for passing Collections.
Frase.
On 29/01/13 17:34, Gordon Sim wrote:
On 01/26/2013 03:43 PM, Fraser Adams wrote:
I've said the following a couple of times on the Qpid Users mailing
list, but nobody has yet bitten, hopefully this issue might start the
discussion again
IMHO
message support is for the client to provide
out of the box support instead of receiving as bytes messages and
having to decode the payload themselves.
Regards,
Rajith
On Sat, Jan 26, 2013 at 10:43 AM, Fraser Adams
fraser.ad...@blueyonder.co.uk wrote:
As a follow up to my posting below.
QMF2
Hi Bruno,
are you *sure* that this worked?
So I've literally just tried a basic JMS consumer with a broker fired up
with qpidd (e.g. authentication enabled) and I used a ConnectionURL
connectionfactory.ConnectionFactory =
ground even
if we don't agree 100% on everything (I'm bound to bang on about the
spec. at some point again :-))
Cheers,
Frase
On 29/01/13 19:05, Gordon Sim wrote:
On 01/29/2013 06:44 PM, Fraser Adams wrote:
From your comment below are you saying that this is exposed in a choice
of three forms
I think that approach deviates from the spec in a similar sort of
subtle way the use of MapMessage does, i.e. you can't send any
Serializable object in the map or list.
I do accept it provides quite a nice and consistent interface provided
you can explicitly control the encoding to use when
Aha, thanks for that - asList() sound like just the thing for me. I'll
make use of that in my next release. Wish I'd realised that at the weekend.
I feel a bit happier now. Hopefully the conversation around
ObjectMessage and Content-Type has struck a chord with you too,
hopefully it has
No need to apologise, it's all cool.
I think that there's a degree of serendipity in all this in that it
serves as a concrete example in the discussion on user/dev and the fact
that it's sometimes a grey area with some of us users doing crazy things :-)
I think the encoding discussion is a
I'm afraid that you've hit the limits of what I might be able to help
with, as I said before there *may* be a way of figuring out the port
down-casting to a qpid specific class, but I couldn't say for sure and
couldn't tell you what class without going through the APIs.
However I'm still
- it remembers the source port when your browser opens
the port 80 connection outward.
-Steve
-Original Message-
From: Fraser Adams [mailto:fraser.ad...@blueyonder.co.uk]
Sent: Thursday, January 31, 2013 1:42 PM
To: users@qpid.apache.org
Subject: Re: Amqp message sender port
I'm afraid that you've
.
Regards.
On Ter, 2013-01-29 at 19:04 +, Fraser Adams wrote:
Hi Bruno,
are you *sure* that this worked?
So I've literally just tried a basic JMS consumer with a broker fired up
with qpidd (e.g. authentication enabled) and I used a ConnectionURL
connectionfactory.ConnectionFactory =
amqp
Hi Bruno,
Thanks for the logs. It's very weird.
I actually copied and pasted the info from the:
ConnectionHelper.createConnection()
amqp://anonymous:anonymous@QpidJMS/vhost?brokerlist='tcp://0.0.0.0:5672'
i.e. the amqp://anon
stuff
directly into the URL part of Add QMF Console
Hi All,
I've been engaged in a conversation with Bruno Matos on this group where
we appear to be seeing different results :'( .
In my GUI's underlying ConnectionHelper class I'd set user/passwd
defaults to guest:guest when no explicit user/passwd were supplied
(probably incorrectly on my
Hi Sergey,
Since we last spoke I had a think about this and a bit of a play and
I've come up with what I reckon is quite an elegant and simple approach
to this, which also embraces the power of the client side which
follows the spirit of this GUI :-)
To explain a bit. As I mentioned in my
Hello,
One thing to bear in mind is that Qpid (at least using AMQP 0.10) is a
centralised/client-server architecture. What I mean by that is that a
producer client has a relationship with the message broker (conceptually
a server) and a consumer client has a relationship with the broker, but
On 03/02/13 18:31, mr_deb wrote:
Thanks for your detail explanation
I agree with your request reply approach to measure round trip latency. I
dont want to add timestamps when consumer receives the message as producer
and consumer can sit in two different in system and their timestamps may not
On 04/02/13 12:34, Zhemzhitsky Sergey wrote:
The only issues I've faced with are:
1. The GUI didn't work with qpid 0.20 client libs (as far as I understand it’s
already fixed)
If you've downloaded version 1.1 it should work with Qpid 0.20, the
issue as you've probably seen on the mailing
On 05/02/13 11:28, Bruno Matos wrote:
Hi Fraser,
I've started a new thread to clean history, I hope you don't mind.
No not at all that makes sense. That's actually quite amusingly
appropriate given the nature of the new thread :-D
In the login window, if I use a wrong password it resets all
Hi,
sorry I didn't get back on this.
Given the behaviour that you're suggesting I'm wondering whether you
care about acks at all? With the C++ qpid::messaging API and JMS it's
possible to configure an Address String with link: {reliability:
unreliable} which says that the consumer application
Is it just msgDepth or do you see the same for msgTotalEnqueues
msgTotalDequeues too
msgDepth only (event with 1.1 version). All the other pages work pretty fine.
Best Regards,
Sergey
Thanks for the clarification I've got a hunch about it. In the
graphs page JavaScript there's a line
Hey Bruno,
Re:
I tested with Trac and it selects the username text if username doesn't
exist. After that, I went to the code and it calls the equals method on
null if the username doesn't exist. In Authenticator.java line 137
replaced the if clause with
if (_accountCache.getProperty(username)
Hi, Sorry I've not got back to you on this.
I'm afraid that I'm a bit rusty on this I'm pretty sure it's in the
x-declare part of an Address String (which I assume you are using to
specify your queue/bindings etc. if you're using qpid::messaging or JMS).
The Address String is specified here
Hi Guys,
I was planning on having a look at the org.apache.qpid.jms.ListMessage
stuff and move away from the cast to MapMessage, but a somewhat irksome
thought struck me before I got started.
As the moment my QMF2 code can compile against more or less any version
of the Qpid Java client
Cheers Sergey,
I mentioned the other day I had a hunch it was in that line :-) I was
literally just about to sit down and take a look at it so I'm glad that
I opened my mail when I did.
Thanks for getting there first, I'll can put my feet up now :-)
Couple of comments inline below
Frase
101 - 200 of 509 matches
Mail list logo
