all that is true, however there is way to abort a slow consumer that has been idle or not acked a message in some time. tim did a nice write up. see: http://java.dzone.com/articles/coming-activemq-59-new-way
that strategy could be extended to blacklist the consumer ip. Some test at: https://github.com/apache/activemq/blob/20f384ce59b758a0f3c1b0e0620e2efd58ca230a/activemq-unit-tests/src/test/java/org/apache/activemq/broker/policy/AbortSlowConsumerTest.java and: https://github.com/apache/activemq/blob/20f384ce59b758a0f3c1b0e0620e2efd58ca230a/activemq-unit-tests/src/test/java/org/apache/activemq/broker/policy/AbortSlowAckConsumerTest.java On 28 January 2014 19:51, artnaseef <[email protected]> wrote: > If there is an errant/inactive consumer on a destination, the best practice > is to locate and remove/correct that consumer. Any actions taken to > work-around its impact will be imperfect. For example, considering a > timeout, what time period would be good to use? Too short and there's a > risk of impacting a perfectly functioning consumer. Too long and the errant > consumer causes some message processing to be delayed for a long time. > Also, automatically termining the errant consumer doesn't prevent the > consumer from be recreated, so it could only buy a very short reprieve. > > There are ways to track down the errant consumer. Can you locate that > consumer and resolve it? > > > > > -- > View this message in context: > http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/Inactive-Expired-CONSUMER-tp4676865p4676914.html > Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. -- http://redhat.com http://blog.garytully.com
