Let me summarize my observations so far (and I think all of these are bugs in activemq-core-5.7.0):
1. Improper PFC kicking-in to persistent topic message publishers When a durable topic subscriber(s) is (are) not consuming, *persistent* message publishing is blocked (PFC) by exceeding topic's *per-destination memory limit*, not *store limit*. In the given test code ( MemoryLimitTest.java <http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/file/n4670061/MemoryLimitTest.java> ), there were no non-durable subscribers connected hence *persistent* message publishing should've gone through regardless of durable subscriber's message consumption until the backlog size hits the total store limit. The given test code easily reproduces this problem with the following scenario: - Embedded broker is configured with 10mb main broker memory limit and 1mb per-destination memory limit. - Embedded broker is configured to use persistent: BrokerService#isPersistent == true. - A durable topic subscriber subscribes with 0 prefetch limit. - A topic publisher starts publishing 0.4mb sized messages and gets blocked after publishing 3 messages. Per the code inspection, this is the side effect with the fact that the store cursor of the topic durable subscriber (i.e. TopicStorePrefetch) records its memory uses to the main broker's memory limit but not to the per-destination memory limit. I verified that the scenario went through by replacing the main broker's memory limit with the per-destination one for the store: persistent message publishing checks the per-destination memory limit before being dispatched to the cursor cache and if it's already over the high watermark, it disables the cache and just gets only into the store w/o increasing the per-destination memory limit hence will hardly reach the 100% of the per-destination limit even afterwards. Try toggling "patchApplied" to true to test this in the given test code ( MemoryLimitTest.java <http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/file/n4670061/MemoryLimitTest.java> ). 2. There's no straightforward way to use VMPendingMessageCursor for non-persistent topic message cursor, when using the StoreDurableSubscriberCursor for the durable topic subscribers. 3. When exists, PendingDurableSubscriberPolicy is used more than once for the pending durable subscriber instantiation so that the StoreDurableSubscriberCursor lastly created and used doesn't have the TopicStorePrefetch instance in it. Please review all the above that I demonstrated and explained here and possibly confirm. Regards, Jake -- View this message in context: http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/cursor-memory-usage-limit-vs-memory-usage-limit-tp4669679p4670061.html Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
