Hmm, that doesn't sound like the magnitude we were expecting. How old was oldest DLQ message compared to the oldest "live" message? Is there any chance there are old messages in destinations other than the DLQ? (Either queues or durable topic subscriptions.) Your initial description sounded like that wasn't the case (messages were processed in a relatively timely manner, unless they got DLQed), but I may have read something into it that wasn't actually there.
On Tue, Jul 28, 2015 at 8:48 PM, Scammell <mark.har...@meridianenergy.co.nz> wrote: > Thanks for this. > > I tried this with a test server which was showing 25% store used. I deleted > each of the 140 or so DLQ entries manually (the "Purge" option for th > ewhole > queue didn't seem to do anything) and the store went down to 21%. > > > > -- > View this message in context: > http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/Store-percent-used-tp4699945p4700024.html > Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. >
