From usersvictoria21@example.net Mon Nov 01 09:20:45 2010 Return-Path: <usersvictoria21@example.net> Delivered-To: victoria21@example.net Received: (qmail 38520 invoked from network); 1 Nov 2010 09:20:45 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by 83.161.120.155 with SMTP; 1 Nov 2010 09:20:45 -0000 Received: (qmail 27304 invoked by uid 500); 1 Nov 2010 09:21:16 -0000 Delivered-To: victoria21@example.net Received: (qmail 27131 invoked by uid 500); 1 Nov 2010 09:21:13 -0000 Mailing-List: contact victoria21@example.net; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: <mailto:victoria21@example.net> List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:victoria21@example.net> List-Post: <mailto:victoria21@example.net> List-Id: <users.activemq.apache.org> Reply-To: victoria21@example.net Delivered-To: mailing list victoria21@example.net Received: (qmail 27123 invoked by uid 99); 1 Nov 2010 09:21:11 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 01 Nov 2010 09:21:11 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=2.2 required=10.0 tests=HTML_MESSAGE,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of victoria21@example.net designates 83.161.120.155 as permitted sender) Received: from [83.161.120.155] (HELO mail1.homeawaycorp.eu) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 01 Nov 2010 09:21:05 +0000 Received: from pps.filterd (lon-sun-mgw01 [83.161.120.155]) by lon-sun-mgw01.wvrgroup.internal (8.14.3/8.14.3) with SMTP id oA19EOZb029729 for <victoria21@example.net>; Mon, 1 Nov 2010 09:20:44 GMT Received: from lon-sun-mail01.wvrgroup.internal (lon-sun-mail01.wvrgroup.internal [83.161.120.155]) by lon-sun-mgw01.wvrgroup.internal with ESMTP id s8hh7pdcy-1 for <victoria21@example.net>; Mon, 01 Nov 2010 09:20:44 +0000 Thread-Index: Act5pg+mTB2uh2WnQ2WVHWXS4WhfUQ== Received: from [83.161.120.155] ([83.161.120.155]) by lon-sun-mail01.wvrgroup.internal with Microsoft SMTPSVC(343)752-6350); Mon, 1 Nov 2010 09:20:44 +0000 Message-ID: <victoria21@example.net> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: "Maciej Rakowicz" <victoria21@example.net> Content-class: urn:content-classes:message X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.3790.4721 Importance: normal Priority: normal To: <victoria21@example.net> Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail-1-1058398177" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Virtual Topic and missed messages gone missing with selectorAware=true Date: Mon, 1 Nov 2010 09:20:43 +0000 X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.935.3) X-OriginalArrivalTime: 01 Nov 2010 09:20:44.0179 (UTC) FILETIME=[0F804E30:01CB79A6] X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10432:5.2.15,1.0.148,0.0.0000 definitions=2010-11-01_05:2010-11-01,2010-11-01,1970-01-01 signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 spamscore=0 ipscore=0 suspectscore=1 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx engine=5.0.0-1005130000 definitions=main-1011010034 --Apple-Mail-1-1058398177 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; delsp=yes; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit All, amq 5.4.0. jdk 1.6 Scenario: broker persistence=true, selectorAware=false Virtual Topic with say one queue. There is a consumer A connected to that queue with a selector. All works fine. Consumer A dies, messages pile up, consumer A starts back up, missed messages are redelivered. You can easily verify that queue receives all posted messages while consumer's down. Now, adding consumer B, since selectorAware=false and consumer B uses an exclusive selector messages sent to consumer A are not consumed by consumer B. All good save the fact that all unmatched messages end up polluting consumer's B queue. All according to the documentation. Flipping selectorAware to true solves one problem but introduces another (way more important in my setup). Unmatched messages won't pile up on consumer's B queue which is fine. However, if consumer A dies they are not sent to consumer's A queue (disappearing after reaching the topic - I dunno where they go) hence disabling any missed message delivery on consumer's A startup. I there any way around it? I really need to handle all missed messages with no exception. At the same time I cannot allow stacking up messages in each and every queue although they are not matched. Btw. I do not have a list of consumers in advance, the subscription is fully dynamic, although since broker runs persistence, once subscribed I do have an idea of who's subscribed even if connection is currently down. I would appreciate any hints. mac --Apple-Mail-1-1058398177-- From usersvictoria21@example.net Mon Nov 01 09:25:48 2010 Return-Path: <usersvictoria21@example.net> Delivered-To: victoria21@example.net Received: (qmail 40012 invoked from network); 1 Nov 2010 09:25:48 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by 83.161.120.155 with SMTP; 1 Nov 2010 09:25:48 -0000 Received: (qmail 33061 invoked by uid 500); 1 Nov 2010 09:26:19 -0000 Delivered-To: victoria21@example.net Received: (qmail 33006 invoked by uid 500); 1 Nov 2010 09:26:17 -0000 Mailing-List: contact victoria21@example.net; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: <mailto:victoria21@example.net> List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:victoria21@example.net> List-Post: <mailto:victoria21@example.net> List-Id: <users.activemq.apache.org> Reply-To: victoria21@example.net Delivered-To: mailing list victoria21@example.net Received: (qmail 32998 invoked by uid 99); 1 Nov 2010 09:26:17 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 01 Nov 2010 09:26:17 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.7 required=10.0 tests=FREEMAIL_FROM,SPF_NEUTRAL X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: neutral (athena.apache.org: 83.161.120.155 is neither permitted nor denied by domain of victoria21@example.net) Received: from [83.161.120.155] (HELO beatrix.epiuse.co.za) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 01 Nov 2010 09:26:10 +0000 Received: from [83.161.120.155] by beatrix.epiuse.co.za with esmtpsa (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from <victoria21@example.net>) id 1PCqdy-0002MX-PB for victoria21@example.net; Mon, 01 Nov 2010 11:25:34 +0200 Message-ID: <victoria21@example.net> Date: Mon, 01 Nov 2010 11:24:07 +0200 From: Roelof Naude <victoria21@example.net> User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:83.161.120.155) Gecko/20100907 Fedora/3.0.7-1.fc12 Lightning/1.0b2pre Thunderbird/3.0.7 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "victoria21@example.net" <victoria21@example.net> Subject: Re: Virtual Topic and missed messages gone missing with selectorAware=true References: <victoria21@example.net> In-Reply-To: <victoria21@example.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit hi maciej, i've run into the exact same problem: http://issues.apache.org/activemq/browse/AMQ-3004 would really like some sort of work-around/fix for this myself. On 11/01/2010 11:20 AM, Maciej Rakowicz wrote: > All, > > amq 5.4.0. jdk 1.6 > > Scenario: > broker persistence=true, selectorAware=false > Virtual Topic with say one queue. There is a consumer A connected to > that queue with a selector. All works fine. Consumer A dies, messages > pile up, consumer A starts back up, missed messages are redelivered. > You can easily verify that queue receives all posted messages while > consumer's down. > Now, adding consumer B, since selectorAware=false and consumer B uses > an exclusive selector messages sent to consumer A are not consumed by > consumer B. All good save the fact that all unmatched messages end up > polluting consumer's B queue. All according to the documentation. > Flipping selectorAware to true solves one problem but introduces > another (way more important in my setup). Unmatched messages won't > pile up on consumer's B queue which is fine. However, if consumer A > dies they are not sent to consumer's A queue (disappearing after > reaching the topic - I dunno where they go) hence disabling any missed > message delivery on consumer's A startup. > > I there any way around it? I really need to handle all missed messages > with no exception. At the same time I cannot allow stacking up > messages in each and every queue although they are not matched. > > Btw. I do not have a list of consumers in advance, the subscription is > fully dynamic, although since broker runs persistence, once subscribed > I do have an idea of who's subscribed even if connection is currently > down. > > I would appreciate any hints. > > mac From usersvictoria21@example.net Mon Nov 01 09:30:12 2010 Return-Path: <usersvictoria21@example.net> Delivered-To: victoria21@example.net Received: (qmail 42717 invoked from network); 1 Nov 2010 09:30:11 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by 83.161.120.155 with SMTP; 1 Nov 2010 09:30:11 -0000 Received: (qmail 38282 invoked by uid 500); 1 Nov 2010 09:30:42 -0000 Delivered-To: victoria21@example.net Received: (qmail 38235 invoked by uid 500); 1 Nov 2010 09:30:40 -0000 Mailing-List: contact victoria21@example.net; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: <mailto:victoria21@example.net> List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:victoria21@example.net> List-Post: <mailto:victoria21@example.net> List-Id: <users.activemq.apache.org> Reply-To: victoria21@example.net Delivered-To: mailing list victoria21@example.net Received: (qmail 38227 invoked by uid 99); 1 Nov 2010 09:30:40 -0000 Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 01 Nov 2010 09:30:40 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.3 required=10.0 tests=FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_PASS,T_TO_NO_BRKTS_FREEMAIL,URI_HEX X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of victoria21@example.net designates 83.161.120.155 as permitted sender) Received: from [83.161.120.155] (HELO mail-vw0-f43.google.com) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 01 Nov 2010 09:30:34 +0000 Received: by vws1 with SMTP id 1so3993614vws.2 for <victoria21@example.net>; Mon, 01 Nov 2010 02:30:13 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:received:in-reply-to :references:date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; bh=9tvUW+2V29Rn3f+tqxQW0CYWuuetOYrSJRILYiUDB7Y=; b=E4+aD3E6Qe+AfFw5nPQQSUX5lwBkDOcbdwxxeW3zhyfTtRXS+cyGB5Dpp6+aBm41me KJw7h8O9Ya919nC+5POXhpSnctVn74/y3i/yfHZXdms7MWI8jqN4w4GNl39UftMrDj23 gmkReaPdhk1LnpyRmMfoN0lmLo484+2OE80aA= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; b=NzwXDEgqadbe04nltwlVU8i6kHdfqSOsUstID9A3usEDPtrbXtHR18RZ7RdK27lZ++ kHE93zXFiJtOnEo7g8HuNC8S5hRUX+lmyMUEOxJReOi0ZJ22cYToACgG98hC6YJ++Bia fjGzXXbizQEyfopFmzsXSWAlKoFi0BmL5E9uU= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 83.161.120.155 with SMTP id cf16mr7982918qab.291.1288603813763; Mon, 01 Nov 2010 02:30:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 83.161.120.155 with HTTP; Mon, 1 Nov 2010 02:30:13 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <victoria21@example.net> References: <victoria21@example.net> Date: Mon, 1 Nov 2010 09:30:13 +0000 Message-ID: <victoria21@example.net> Subject: Re: Soap over JMS query via Apache MQ From: Gary Tully <victoria21@example.net> To: victoria21@example.net Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org this is worth a read: http://activemq.apache.org/how-should-i-implement-request-response-with-jms.html On 29 October 2010 21:26, gilboy <victoria21@example.net> wrote: > > Hi > > I am trying to determine how many many queues should be required to support > a typical Request/Response Web Service call over JMS via Apache MQ. > > Initially I thought I would need 2. However, after doing a quick test it > seems like I only need 1. I had thought that in JMS a message can only be > read by only 1 consumer. Hence, I thought the client would need to act as > both a producer and consumer of messages, whilst the same would apply for > the web service. > > Any help would be greatly appreciated > > Thanks > Joe > > -- > View this message in context: http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/Soap-over-JMS-query-via-Apache-MQ-tp3019716p3019716.html > Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailing list victoria21@example.net. > -- http://blog.garytully.com http://fusesource.com From usersvictoria21@example.net Mon Nov 01 09:32:55 2010 Return-Path: <usersvictoria21@example.net> Delivered-To: victoria21@example.net Received: (qmail 43792 invoked from network); 1 Nov 2010 09:32:55 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by 83.161.120.155 with SMTP; 1 Nov 2010 09:32:55 -0000 Received: (qmail 41547 invoked by uid 500); 1 Nov 2010 09:33:26 -0000 Delivered-To: victoria21@example.net Received: (qmail 41508 invoked by uid 500); 1 Nov 2010 09:33:23 -0000 Mailing-List: contact victoria21@example.net; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: <mailto:victoria21@example.net> List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:victoria21@example.net> List-Post: <mailto:victoria21@example.net> List-Id: <users.activemq.apache.org> Reply-To: victoria21@example.net Delivered-To: mailing list victoria21@example.net Received: (qmail 41500 invoked by uid 99); 1 Nov 2010 09:33:23 -0000 Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 01 Nov 2010 09:33:23 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=10.0 tests=FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_PASS,T_TO_NO_BRKTS_FREEMAIL X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of victoria21@example.net designates 83.161.120.155 as permitted sender) Received: from [83.161.120.155] (HELO mail-gy0-f171.google.com) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 01 Nov 2010 09:33:16 +0000 Received: by gyd12 with SMTP id 12so3749497gyd.2 for <victoria21@example.net>; Mon, 01 Nov 2010 02:32:55 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:received:in-reply-to :references:date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; bh=vC6cK0MZUZZZD9AxGAyMFGNxJzp8a8EeDlbgiE8mwFM=; b=FHOcZM5e82V7e5TQhL7NTVQqLELa/lg/8uZrDsPCbGLC2we37i9CHyMVRFT22rIUlE qE0Niw9rmp3Wbn2g0ZQGMRkxyu4iJKgv43QdAwRtJ6XdXXyVopI0yRZHQ0dtnZvgnvUJ vWDv6bsZLiRO4LJpwRSKpO55N34qKOFaULe/o= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; b=T+S1Xi8gma3GaDJkE6tps/Wuyfm+FT4G8QLJXbqgg2rYc0epDlwJZAAMQ2X4KROFsB O2gG0wc2SLg0DI9RuPuD+CWzRM8n5k/BWloPVs4wevw+oIWknCP5zULcBJTeDmczYZ29 36FX8JFzeUQaF5vsCLtGX7U1CNpKwvU9U1JXw= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 83.161.120.155 with SMTP id h2mr13795436qcn.284.1288603975532; Mon, 01 Nov 2010 02:32:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 83.161.120.155 with HTTP; Mon, 1 Nov 2010 02:32:55 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <victoria21@example.net> References: <victoria21@example.net> Date: Mon, 1 Nov 2010 09:32:55 +0000 Message-ID: <victoria21@example.net> Subject: Re: Virtual Topic and missed messages gone missing with selectorAware=true From: Gary Tully <victoria21@example.net> To: victoria21@example.net Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org Message expiry may help in the short term, set a time to live on the messages such that the built up unmatched messages expire and are removed. On 1 November 2010 09:20, Maciej Rakowicz <victoria21@example.net> wrote: > All, > > amq 5.4.0. jdk 1.6 > > Scenario: > broker persistence=true, selectorAware=false > Virtual Topic with say one queue. There is a consumer A connected to that > queue with a selector. All works fine. Consumer A dies, messages pile up, > consumer A starts back up, missed messages are redelivered. You can easily > verify that queue receives all posted messages while consumer's down. > Now, adding consumer B, since selectorAware=false and consumer B uses an > exclusive selector messages sent to consumer A are not consumed by consumer > B. All good save the fact that all unmatched messages end up polluting > consumer's B queue. All according to the documentation. > Flipping selectorAware to true solves one problem but introduces another > (way more important in my setup). Unmatched messages won't pile up on > consumer's B queue which is fine. However, if consumer A dies they are not > sent to consumer's A queue (disappearing after reaching the topic - I dunno > where they go) hence disabling any missed message delivery on consumer's A > startup. > > I there any way around it? I really need to handle all missed messages with > no exception. At the same time I cannot allow stacking up messages in each > and every queue although they are not matched. > > Btw. I do not have a list of consumers in advance, the subscription is fully > dynamic, although since broker runs persistence, once subscribed I do have > an idea of who's subscribed even if connection is currently down. > > I would appreciate any hints. > > mac -- http://blog.garytully.com http://fusesource.com From usersvictoria21@example.net Mon Nov 01 09:48:01 2010 Return-Path: <usersvictoria21@example.net> Delivered-To: victoria21@example.net Received: (qmail 45480 invoked from network); 1 Nov 2010 09:48:01 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by 83.161.120.155 with SMTP; 1 Nov 2010 09:48:01 -0000 Received: (qmail 45971 invoked by uid 500); 1 Nov 2010 09:48:32 -0000 Delivered-To: victoria21@example.net Received: (qmail 45808 invoked by uid 500); 1 Nov 2010 09:48:30 -0000 Mailing-List: contact victoria21@example.net; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: <mailto:victoria21@example.net> List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:victoria21@example.net> List-Post: <mailto:victoria21@example.net> List-Id: <users.activemq.apache.org> Reply-To: victoria21@example.net Delivered-To: mailing list victoria21@example.net Received: (qmail 45800 invoked by uid 99); 1 Nov 2010 09:48:29 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 01 Nov 2010 09:48:29 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.0 required=10.0 tests=SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of victoria21@example.net designates 83.161.120.155 as permitted sender) Received: from [83.161.120.155] (HELO mail1.homeawaycorp.eu) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 01 Nov 2010 09:48:25 +0000 Received: from pps.filterd (lon-sun-mgw01 [83.161.120.155]) by lon-sun-mgw01.wvrgroup.internal (8.14.3/8.14.3) with SMTP id oA19cgWF015077 for <victoria21@example.net>; Mon, 1 Nov 2010 09:48:04 GMT Received: from lon-sun-mail01.wvrgroup.internal (lon-sun-mail01.wvrgroup.internal [83.161.120.155]) by lon-sun-mgw01.wvrgroup.internal with ESMTP id s8hh7pq9a-2 for <victoria21@example.net>; Mon, 01 Nov 2010 09:48:03 +0000 Thread-Index: Act5qeDq4HhOr/JdTpGnZyw/BSAMDQ== Received: from [83.161.120.155] ([83.161.120.155]) by lon-sun-mail01.wvrgroup.internal with Microsoft SMTPSVC(343)752-6350); Mon, 1 Nov 2010 09:48:03 +0000 Message-ID: <victoria21@example.net> From: "Maciej Rakowicz" <victoria21@example.net> Content-class: urn:content-classes:message X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.3790.4721 Importance: normal Priority: normal To: <victoria21@example.net> In-Reply-To: <victoria21@example.net> Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; delsp=yes; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Virtual Topic and missed messages gone missing with selectorAware=true Date: Mon, 1 Nov 2010 09:48:02 +0000 References: <victoria21@example.net> <victoria21@example.net> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.935.3) X-OriginalArrivalTime: 01 Nov 2010 09:48:03.0773 (UTC) FILETIME=[E0C67ED0:01CB79A9] X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10432:5.2.15,1.0.148,0.0.0000 definitions=2010-11-01_05:2010-11-01,2010-11-01,1970-01-01 signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 spamscore=0 ipscore=0 suspectscore=1 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx engine=5.0.0-1005130000 definitions=main-1011010039 I guess, only if we keep downtimes short enough so 'matched' messages don't expire and big enough maxPageSize or something to keep matched messages consumed. Does anyone know if this (i.e. AMQ-3004) is going to be worked on in the near future? m. On 1 Nov 2010, at 09:32, Gary Tully wrote: > Message expiry may help in the short term, set a time to live on the > messages such that the built up unmatched messages expire and are > removed. > > On 1 November 2010 09:20, Maciej Rakowicz <victoria21@example.net> > wrote: >> All, >> >> amq 5.4.0. jdk 1.6 >> >> Scenario: >> broker persistence=true, selectorAware=false >> Virtual Topic with say one queue. There is a consumer A connected >> to that >> queue with a selector. All works fine. Consumer A dies, messages >> pile up, >> consumer A starts back up, missed messages are redelivered. You can >> easily >> verify that queue receives all posted messages while consumer's down. >> Now, adding consumer B, since selectorAware=false and consumer B >> uses an >> exclusive selector messages sent to consumer A are not consumed by >> consumer >> B. All good save the fact that all unmatched messages end up >> polluting >> consumer's B queue. All according to the documentation. >> Flipping selectorAware to true solves one problem but introduces >> another >> (way more important in my setup). Unmatched messages won't pile up on >> consumer's B queue which is fine. However, if consumer A dies they >> are not >> sent to consumer's A queue (disappearing after reaching the topic - >> I dunno >> where they go) hence disabling any missed message delivery on >> consumer's A >> startup. >> >> I there any way around it? I really need to handle all missed >> messages with >> no exception. At the same time I cannot allow stacking up messages >> in each >> and every queue although they are not matched. >> >> Btw. I do not have a list of consumers in advance, the subscription >> is fully >> dynamic, although since broker runs persistence, once subscribed I >> do have >> an idea of who's subscribed even if connection is currently down. >> >> I would appreciate any hints. >> >> mac > > > > -- > http://blog.garytully.com > http://fusesource.com From usersvictoria21@example.net Mon Nov 01 10:25:40 2010 Return-Path: <usersvictoria21@example.net> Delivered-To: victoria21@example.net Received: (qmail 66849 invoked from network); 1 Nov 2010 10:25:40 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by 83.161.120.155 with SMTP; 1 Nov 2010 10:25:40 -0000 Received: (qmail 84672 invoked by uid 500); 1 Nov 2010 10:26:11 -0000 Delivered-To: victoria21@example.net Received: (qmail 84527 invoked by uid 500); 1 Nov 2010 10:26:08 -0000 Mailing-List: contact victoria21@example.net; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: <mailto:victoria21@example.net> List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:victoria21@example.net> List-Post: <mailto:victoria21@example.net> List-Id: <users.activemq.apache.org> Reply-To: victoria21@example.net Delivered-To: mailing list victoria21@example.net Received: (qmail 84519 invoked by uid 99); 1 Nov 2010 10:26:07 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 01 Nov 2010 10:26:07 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.0 required=10.0 tests=SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of victoria21@example.net designates 83.161.120.155 as permitted sender) Received: from [83.161.120.155] (HELO mail1.homeawaycorp.eu) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 01 Nov 2010 10:26:03 +0000 Received: from pps.filterd (lon-sun-mgw01 [83.161.120.155]) by lon-sun-mgw01.wvrgroup.internal (8.14.3/8.14.3) with SMTP id oA1A0kNT030869 for <victoria21@example.net>; Mon, 1 Nov 2010 10:25:42 GMT Received: from lon-sun-mail01.wvrgroup.internal (lon-sun-mail01.wvrgroup.internal [83.161.120.155]) by lon-sun-mgw01.wvrgroup.internal with ESMTP id s8hh7q9cd-1 for <victoria21@example.net>; Mon, 01 Nov 2010 10:25:41 +0000 Thread-Index: Act5ryLiVglm88tTSnaE9hHu3VLKxA== Received: from [83.161.120.155] ([83.161.120.155]) by lon-sun-mail01.wvrgroup.internal with Microsoft SMTPSVC(343)752-6350); Mon, 1 Nov 2010 10:25:41 +0000 Message-ID: <victoria21@example.net> Content-class: urn:content-classes:message X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.3790.4721 Importance: normal Priority: normal From: "Maciej Rakowicz" <victoria21@example.net> To: <victoria21@example.net> In-Reply-To: <victoria21@example.net> Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; delsp=yes; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Virtual Topic and missed messages gone missing with selectorAware=true Date: Mon, 1 Nov 2010 10:25:40 +0000 References: <victoria21@example.net> <victoria21@example.net> <victoria21@example.net> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.935.3) X-OriginalArrivalTime: 01 Nov 2010 10:25:41.0875 (UTC) FILETIME=[22B58430:01CB79AF] X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10432:5.2.15,1.0.148,0.0.0000 definitions=2010-11-01_05:2010-11-01,2010-11-01,1970-01-01 signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 spamscore=0 ipscore=0 suspectscore=1 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx engine=5.0.0-1005130000 definitions=main-1011010042 in case of selectorAware=true and consumer down, what happens to those messages? are they discarded? Is there anything sent to one of the advisories? I can't seem to find it anywhere. On 1 Nov 2010, at 09:48, Maciej Rakowicz wrote: > I guess, only if we keep downtimes short enough so 'matched' > messages don't expire and big enough maxPageSize or something to > keep matched messages consumed. > > Does anyone know if this (i.e. AMQ-3004) is going to be worked on in > the near future? > > m. > > On 1 Nov 2010, at 09:32, Gary Tully wrote: > >> Message expiry may help in the short term, set a time to live on the >> messages such that the built up unmatched messages expire and are >> removed. >> >> On 1 November 2010 09:20, Maciej Rakowicz <victoria21@example.net> >> wrote: >>> All, >>> >>> amq 5.4.0. jdk 1.6 >>> >>> Scenario: >>> broker persistence=true, selectorAware=false >>> Virtual Topic with say one queue. There is a consumer A connected >>> to that >>> queue with a selector. All works fine. Consumer A dies, messages >>> pile up, >>> consumer A starts back up, missed messages are redelivered. You >>> can easily >>> verify that queue receives all posted messages while consumer's >>> down. >>> Now, adding consumer B, since selectorAware=false and consumer B >>> uses an >>> exclusive selector messages sent to consumer A are not consumed by >>> consumer >>> B. All good save the fact that all unmatched messages end up >>> polluting >>> consumer's B queue. All according to the documentation. >>> Flipping selectorAware to true solves one problem but introduces >>> another >>> (way more important in my setup). Unmatched messages won't pile up >>> on >>> consumer's B queue which is fine. However, if consumer A dies they >>> are not >>> sent to consumer's A queue (disappearing after reaching the topic >>> - I dunno >>> where they go) hence disabling any missed message delivery on >>> consumer's A >>> startup. >>> >>> I there any way around it? I really need to handle all missed >>> messages with >>> no exception. At the same time I cannot allow stacking up messages >>> in each >>> and every queue although they are not matched. >>> >>> Btw. I do not have a list of consumers in advance, the >>> subscription is fully >>> dynamic, although since broker runs persistence, once subscribed I >>> do have >>> an idea of who's subscribed even if connection is currently down. >>> >>> I would appreciate any hints. >>> >>> mac >> >> >> >> -- >> http://blog.garytully.com >> http://fusesource.com > From usersvictoria21@example.net Mon Nov 01 12:16:56 2010 Return-Path: <usersvictoria21@example.net> Delivered-To: victoria21@example.net Received: (qmail 35780 invoked from network); 1 Nov 2010 12:16:56 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by 83.161.120.155 with SMTP; 1 Nov 2010 12:16:56 -0000 Received: (qmail 30782 invoked by uid 500); 1 Nov 2010 12:17:27 -0000 Delivered-To: victoria21@example.net Received: (qmail 30639 invoked by uid 500); 1 Nov 2010 12:17:25 -0000 Mailing-List: contact victoria21@example.net; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: <mailto:victoria21@example.net> List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:victoria21@example.net> List-Post: <mailto:victoria21@example.net> List-Id: <users.activemq.apache.org> Reply-To: victoria21@example.net Delivered-To: mailing list victoria21@example.net Received: (qmail 30631 invoked by uid 99); 1 Nov 2010 12:17:24 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 01 Nov 2010 12:17:24 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.7 required=10.0 tests=RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_NEUTRAL X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: neutral (athena.apache.org: local policy) Received: from [83.161.120.155] (HELO smtpq3.gn.mail.iss.as9143.net) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 01 Nov 2010 12:17:17 +0000 Received: from [83.161.120.155] (helo=smtp9.gn.mail.iss.as9143.net) by smtpq3.gn.mail.iss.as9143.net with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from <victoria21@example.net>) id 1PCtJl-0007uF-6C for victoria21@example.net; Mon, 01 Nov 2010 13:16:53 +0100 Received: from 5ed6b1f6.cm-7-7c.dynamic.ziggo.nl ([83.161.120.155] helo=mail.svenvintges.nl) by smtp9.gn.mail.iss.as9143.net with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from <victoria21@example.net>) id 1PCtJi-0001lL-2E for victoria21@example.net; Mon, 01 Nov 2010 13:16:50 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Mon, 01 Nov 2010 13:16:54 +0100 From: Sven Vintges <victoria21@example.net> To: <victoria21@example.net> Subject: Re: Virtual Topic and missed messages gone missing with =?UTF-8?Q?selectorAware=3Dtrue?= In-Reply-To: <victoria21@example.net> References: <victoria21@example.net> <victoria21@example.net> <victoria21@example.net> <victoria21@example.net> Message-ID: <victoria21@example.net> X-Sender: victoria21@example.net User-Agent: Roundcube Webmail/0.4.2 X-ZiggoSMTP-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the ISP for more information X-ZiggoSMTP-MailScanner-ID: 1PCtJi-0001lL-2E X-ZiggoSMTP-MailScanner: Found to be clean X-ZiggoSMTP-MailScanner-SpamCheck: geen spam, SpamAssassin (niet cached, score=-1.3, vereist 5, ALL_TRUSTED -1.80, BAYES_20 -0.74, SARE_LWSHORTT 1.24) X-ZiggoSMTP-MailScanner-From: victoria21@example.net X-Old-Spam-Status: No Perhaps a work-around would be to create a garbage-service. Ie. a services that pops off all messages not needed by the consumer to /dev/null? Though you probably don't know which messages are not needed by the subscriber since you don't know which subscribers you will have... Perhaps you could create an algorithm that does something like "if the consumer is up and the message is older than xxx time" pop it off? On Mon, 1 Nov 2010 10:25:40 +0000, "Maciej Rakowicz" <victoria21@example.net> wrote: > in case of selectorAware=true and consumer down, what happens to > those messages? are they discarded? Is there anything sent to one of > the advisories? I can't seem to find it anywhere. > > On 1 Nov 2010, at 09:48, Maciej Rakowicz wrote: > >> I guess, only if we keep downtimes short enough so 'matched' >> messages don't expire and big enough maxPageSize or something to keep >> matched messages consumed. >> >> Does anyone know if this (i.e. AMQ-3004) is going to be worked on in >> the near future? >> >> m. >> >> On 1 Nov 2010, at 09:32, Gary Tully wrote: >> >>> Message expiry may help in the short term, set a time to live on >>> the >>> messages such that the built up unmatched messages expire and are >>> removed. >>> >>> On 1 November 2010 09:20, Maciej Rakowicz <victoria21@example.net> >>> wrote: >>>> All, >>>> >>>> amq 5.4.0. jdk 1.6 >>>> >>>> Scenario: >>>> broker persistence=true, selectorAware=false >>>> Virtual Topic with say one queue. There is a consumer A connected >>>> to that >>>> queue with a selector. All works fine. Consumer A dies, messages >>>> pile up, >>>> consumer A starts back up, missed messages are redelivered. You >>>> can easily >>>> verify that queue receives all posted messages while consumer's >>>> down. >>>> Now, adding consumer B, since selectorAware=false and consumer B >>>> uses an >>>> exclusive selector messages sent to consumer A are not consumed by >>>> consumer >>>> B. All good save the fact that all unmatched messages end up >>>> polluting >>>> consumer's B queue. All according to the documentation. >>>> Flipping selectorAware to true solves one problem but introduces >>>> another >>>> (way more important in my setup). Unmatched messages won't pile up >>>> on >>>> consumer's B queue which is fine. However, if consumer A dies they >>>> are not >>>> sent to consumer's A queue (disappearing after reaching the topic >>>> - I dunno >>>> where they go) hence disabling any missed message delivery on >>>> consumer's A >>>> startup. >>>> >>>> I there any way around it? I really need to handle all missed >>>> messages with >>>> no exception. At the same time I cannot allow stacking up messages >>>> in each >>>> and every queue although they are not matched. >>>> >>>> Btw. I do not have a list of consumers in advance, the >>>> subscription is fully >>>> dynamic, although since broker runs persistence, once subscribed I >>>> do have >>>> an idea of who's subscribed even if connection is currently down. >>>> >>>> I would appreciate any hints. >>>> >>>> mac >>> >>> >>> >>> -- http://blog.garytully.com >>> http://fusesource.com >> From usersvictoria21@example.net Tue Nov 02 08:42:26 2010 Return-Path: <usersvictoria21@example.net> Delivered-To: victoria21@example.net Received: (qmail 64757 invoked from network); 2 Nov 2010 08:42:25 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by 83.161.120.155 with SMTP; 2 Nov 2010 08:42:25 -0000 Received: (qmail 96869 invoked by uid 500); 2 Nov 2010 08:42:57 -0000 Delivered-To: victoria21@example.net Received: (qmail 96518 invoked by uid 500); 2 Nov 2010 08:42:54 -0000 Mailing-List: contact victoria21@example.net; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: <mailto:victoria21@example.net> List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:victoria21@example.net> List-Post: <mailto:victoria21@example.net> List-Id: <users.activemq.apache.org> Reply-To: victoria21@example.net Delivered-To: mailing list victoria21@example.net Received: (qmail 96510 invoked by uid 99); 2 Nov 2010 08:42:53 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 02 Nov 2010 08:42:53 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=2.3 required=10.0 tests=SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_SOFTFAIL,URI_HEX X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: softfail (athena.apache.org: transitioning domain of victoria21@example.net does not designate 83.161.120.155 as permitted sender) Received: from [83.161.120.155] (HELO kuber.nabble.com) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 02 Nov 2010 08:42:48 +0000 Received: from joe.nabble.com ([83.161.120.155]) by kuber.nabble.com with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from <victoria21@example.net>) id 1PDCRn-0004ph-Rl for victoria21@example.net; Tue, 02 Nov 2010 01:42:27 -0700 Date: Tue, 2 Nov 2010 01:42:27 -0700 (PDT) From: werdex <victoria21@example.net> To: victoria21@example.net Message-ID: <victoria21@example.net> Subject: Scheduler failover in Master-Slave MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi! I am using AMQ_SCHEDULED_DELAY when sending a message to ActiveMQ and found that scheduler stores it data at activemq-data/scheduler. In jdbc master-slave topology this data will be lost when master node goes down. What is the best way to implement scheduler failover? Thx! -- View this message in context: http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/Scheduler-failover-in-Master-Slave-tp3023340p3023340.html Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailing list victoria21@example.net. From usersvictoria21@example.net Tue Nov 02 09:06:09 2010 Return-Path: <usersvictoria21@example.net> Delivered-To: victoria21@example.net Received: (qmail 78707 invoked from network); 2 Nov 2010 09:06:09 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by 83.161.120.155 with SMTP; 2 Nov 2010 09:06:09 -0000 Received: (qmail 18666 invoked by uid 500); 2 Nov 2010 09:06:40 -0000 Delivered-To: victoria21@example.net Received: (qmail 18582 invoked by uid 500); 2 Nov 2010 09:06:38 -0000 Mailing-List: contact victoria21@example.net; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: <mailto:victoria21@example.net> List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:victoria21@example.net> List-Post: <mailto:victoria21@example.net> List-Id: <users.activemq.apache.org> Reply-To: victoria21@example.net Delivered-To: mailing list victoria21@example.net Received: (qmail 18574 invoked by uid 99); 2 Nov 2010 09:06:37 -0000 Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 02 Nov 2010 09:06:37 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.3 required=10.0 tests=FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_PASS,T_TO_NO_BRKTS_FREEMAIL,URI_HEX X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of victoria21@example.net designates 83.161.120.155 as permitted sender) Received: from [83.161.120.155] (HELO mail-gw0-f43.google.com) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 02 Nov 2010 09:06:29 +0000 Received: by gwj20 with SMTP id 20so4681951gwj.2 for <victoria21@example.net>; Tue, 02 Nov 2010 02:06:08 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:content-type:mime-version :subject:from:in-reply-to:date:content-transfer-encoding:message-id :references:to:x-mailer; bh=E/3YhurmYgk1yvDWgLQP4i2U8KTxi5CJPTc0i6EXdWs=; b=SGo3bNcWaKigfdOz6KSALP8ae4aiovfqJ16tzX3Da9Wc1P7mlIP0h0mSG94X+/j3kD owyxoP7aYcrJqirubC81GyT2cw84I5BV997pL63GiEO7N9dNsJQwyHa6cgnF4hTYDMvq A3/gPh2Z64z6qlaJnkRXdvEyyloab/1Jq7Sho= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=content-type:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to:x-mailer; b=hTM2szwKR+L6y5QrXuC1G5gEhTa9XewVSD4J7238K0cMwkIwBYqsoK4XPD2tP8KPRT nmKPe/4jGMziokS8w02WIfFAn3nxkbDMUN5KgDtwEKu5g2chziKMFqZP3C2MqSHrEYtR 6LjX+DIhqX/tIpzmww0sGPwoItVJ+CkkfM0Ow= Received: by 83.161.120.155 with SMTP id n18mr29967098ybd.154.1288688768546; Tue, 02 Nov 2010 02:06:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [83.161.120.155] (host86-163-7-41.range86-163.btcentralplus.com [83.161.120.155]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id z16sm8657315ybm.16.283.161.120.155.06.06 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Tue, 02 Nov 2010 02:06:07 -0700 (PDT) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1081) Subject: Re: Scheduler failover in Master-Slave From: Rob Davies <victoria21@example.net> In-Reply-To: <victoria21@example.net> Date: Tue, 2 Nov 2010 09:06:04 +0000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <victoria21@example.net> References: <victoria21@example.net> To: victoria21@example.net X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1081) X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org The only way to do this currently is to use a SAN or GFS - see = http://activemq.apache.org/shared-file-system-master-slave.html On 2 Nov 2010, at 08:42, werdex wrote: >=20 > Hi! > I am using AMQ_SCHEDULED_DELAY when sending a message to ActiveMQ and = found > that scheduler stores it data at activemq-data/scheduler. In jdbc > master-slave topology this data will be lost when master node goes = down. > What is the best way to implement scheduler failover? > Thx! > --=20 > View this message in context: = http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/Scheduler-failover-in-Master-Slave-t= p3023340p3023340.html > Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailing list victoria21@example.net. From usersvictoria21@example.net Tue Nov 02 09:25:42 2010 Return-Path: <usersvictoria21@example.net> Delivered-To: victoria21@example.net Received: (qmail 85506 invoked from network); 2 Nov 2010 09:25:41 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by 83.161.120.155 with SMTP; 2 Nov 2010 09:25:41 -0000 Received: (qmail 49641 invoked by uid 500); 2 Nov 2010 09:26:12 -0000 Delivered-To: victoria21@example.net Received: (qmail 49305 invoked by uid 500); 2 Nov 2010 09:26:10 -0000 Mailing-List: contact victoria21@example.net; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: <mailto:victoria21@example.net> List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:victoria21@example.net> List-Post: <mailto:victoria21@example.net> List-Id: <users.activemq.apache.org> Reply-To: victoria21@example.net Delivered-To: mailing list victoria21@example.net Received: (qmail 49296 invoked by uid 99); 2 Nov 2010 09:26:09 -0000 Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 02 Nov 2010 09:26:09 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=2.3 required=10.0 tests=SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_SOFTFAIL,URI_HEX X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: softfail (nike.apache.org: transitioning domain of victoria21@example.net does not designate 83.161.120.155 as permitted sender) Received: from [83.161.120.155] (HELO kuber.nabble.com) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 02 Nov 2010 09:26:02 +0000 Received: from joe.nabble.com ([83.161.120.155]) by kuber.nabble.com with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from <victoria21@example.net>) id 1PDD7d-0008SV-Mw for victoria21@example.net; Tue, 02 Nov 2010 02:25:41 -0700 Date: Tue, 2 Nov 2010 02:25:41 -0700 (PDT) From: werdex <victoria21@example.net> To: victoria21@example.net Message-ID: <victoria21@example.net> In-Reply-To: <victoria21@example.net> References: <victoria21@example.net> <victoria21@example.net> Subject: Re: Scheduler failover in Master-Slave MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org Thx for reply! Maybe is it possible to continue to keep the messages in database (oracle,ms-sql) , but use shared file system only for scheduler data directory? -- View this message in context: http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/Scheduler-failover-in-Master-Slave-tp3023340p3023396.html Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailing list victoria21@example.net. From usersvictoria21@example.net Tue Nov 02 09:57:46 2010 Return-Path: <usersvictoria21@example.net> Delivered-To: victoria21@example.net Received: (qmail 98379 invoked from network); 2 Nov 2010 09:57:46 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by 83.161.120.155 with SMTP; 2 Nov 2010 09:57:46 -0000 Received: (qmail 86946 invoked by uid 500); 2 Nov 2010 09:58:17 -0000 Delivered-To: victoria21@example.net Received: (qmail 86793 invoked by uid 500); 2 Nov 2010 09:58:14 -0000 Mailing-List: contact victoria21@example.net; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: <mailto:victoria21@example.net> List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:victoria21@example.net> List-Post: <mailto:victoria21@example.net> List-Id: <users.activemq.apache.org> Reply-To: victoria21@example.net Delivered-To: mailing list victoria21@example.net Received: (qmail 86785 invoked by uid 99); 2 Nov 2010 09:58:13 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 02 Nov 2010 09:58:13 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.3 required=10.0 tests=FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_PASS,T_TO_NO_BRKTS_FREEMAIL,URI_HEX X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of victoria21@example.net designates 83.161.120.155 as permitted sender) Received: from [83.161.120.155] (HELO mail-yw0-f43.google.com) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 02 Nov 2010 09:58:07 +0000 Received: by ywi6 with SMTP id 6so4268510ywi.2 for <victoria21@example.net>; Tue, 02 Nov 2010 02:57:46 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:content-type:mime-version :subject:from:in-reply-to:date:content-transfer-encoding:message-id :references:to:x-mailer; bh=owcGAfsToeUI1FXjllrLSHBtLr4YDHAKhrrBsbQTa4A=; b=fGOno1dRL+Z/vNTm774CQq6CD5uuceDDE1WG0r/exNcrCehUG7D8eHng/vtMd4LGmr kBqGgeJ1KbuMm0242fpOCv+RChpw5XUWwcSDaERzdtQmZkzBMLbnfNxRfktDkqbTEzrl doip3CKDErRNnhX6jB39a3bjuKI5uTT4t/HNg= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=content-type:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to:x-mailer; b=jvodJ/idpBYNSxwauNO8KFWu4m2zZ5EaoPdGPeWsd+elb+iYwViLywyPtxEQpWNwdN n0kmfITelTUN0NwXZN3h1GCVpCQ/r4wlKTF0zwen6AJ3Y8qG3p77RyYCX/Cck24cheoC hkcyq33A7oEsPdZYLq/Rf4PStJGhtT/autplY= Received: by 83.161.120.155 with SMTP id o17mr30499483ybb.21.1288691866197; Tue, 02 Nov 2010 02:57:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [83.161.120.155] (host86-163-7-41.range86-163.btcentralplus.com [83.161.120.155]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id i69sm6110185yha.8.283.161.120.155.57.44 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Tue, 02 Nov 2010 02:57:45 -0700 (PDT) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1081) Subject: Re: Scheduler failover in Master-Slave From: Rob Davies <victoria21@example.net> In-Reply-To: <victoria21@example.net> Date: Tue, 2 Nov 2010 09:57:42 +0000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <victoria21@example.net> References: <victoria21@example.net> <victoria21@example.net> <victoria21@example.net> To: victoria21@example.net X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1081) Yes - that would be possible - you can set the directory used for the = scheduler database in the activemq XML configuration file On 2 Nov 2010, at 09:25, werdex wrote: >=20 > Thx for reply! > Maybe is it possible to continue to keep the messages in database > (oracle,ms-sql) , but use shared file system only for scheduler data > directory? > --=20 > View this message in context: = http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/Scheduler-failover-in-Master-Slave-t= p3023340p3023396.html > Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailing list victoria21@example.net. From usersvictoria21@example.net Tue Nov 02 10:51:29 2010 Return-Path: <usersvictoria21@example.net> Delivered-To: victoria21@example.net Received: (qmail 25231 invoked from network); 2 Nov 2010 10:51:28 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by 83.161.120.155 with SMTP; 2 Nov 2010 10:51:28 -0000 Received: (qmail 61769 invoked by uid 500); 2 Nov 2010 10:52:00 -0000 Delivered-To: victoria21@example.net Received: (qmail 61519 invoked by uid 500); 2 Nov 2010 10:51:57 -0000 Mailing-List: contact victoria21@example.net; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: <mailto:victoria21@example.net> List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:victoria21@example.net> List-Post: <mailto:victoria21@example.net> List-Id: <users.activemq.apache.org> Reply-To: victoria21@example.net Delivered-To: mailing list victoria21@example.net Received: (qmail 61511 invoked by uid 99); 2 Nov 2010 10:51:56 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 02 Nov 2010 10:51:56 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.0 required=10.0 tests=SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of victoria21@example.net designates 83.161.120.155 as permitted sender) Received: from [83.161.120.155] (HELO mailhost1.indra.es) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 02 Nov 2010 10:51:49 +0000 Received: from MadarrVHub03.indra.es (83.161.120.155) by MADARREDGE02.indra.es (83.161.120.155) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 83.161.120.155; Tue, 2 Nov 2010 11:51:21 +0100 Received: from [83.161.120.155] (83.161.120.155) by MadarrVHub03.indra.es (83.161.120.155) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 83.161.120.155; Tue, 2 Nov 2010 11:51:27 +0100 Message-ID: <victoria21@example.net> Date: Tue, 2 Nov 2010 11:51:26 +0100 From: Manuel Teira Paz <victoria21@example.net> User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; es-ES; rv:83.161.120.155) Gecko/20101027 Lightning/1.0b2 Thunderbird/3.1.6 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: ActiveMQ Users <victoria21@example.net> Subject: Thread and memory usage on 5.4.1 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hello all. I'm working into the migration from activemq 4.1 to activemq 5.4.1. One of the things we have noticed is a sensible growth in both memory and number of thread usage of our application. I would like to know if this is the expected behaviour, and also gain some insights in what threads are spread by a broker and by a connection. What are the expected number of threads spent by, for example, one connection? Also, what tuning could we use to control these figures and what could be the drawbacks? Best regards. -- Manuel Este correo electr=F3nico y, en su caso, cualquier fichero anexo al mismo, = contiene informaci=F3n de car=E1cter confidencial exclusivamente dirigida a= su destinatario o destinatarios. Si no es vd. el destinatario indicado, qu= eda notificado que la lectura, utilizaci=F3n, divulgaci=F3n y/o copia sin a= utorizaci=F3n est=E1 prohibida en virtud de la legislaci=F3n vigente. En el= caso de haber recibido este correo electr=F3nico por error, se ruega notif= icar inmediatamente esta circunstancia mediante reenv=EDo a la direcci=F3n = electr=F3nica del remitente. Evite imprimir este mensaje si no es estrictamente necesario. This email and any file attached to it (when applicable) contain(s) confide= ntial information that is exclusively addressed to its recipient(s). If you= are not the indicated recipient, you are informed that reading, using, dis= seminating and/or copying it without authorisation is forbidden in accordan= ce with the legislation in effect. If you have received this email by mista= ke, please immediately notify the sender of the situation by resending it t= o their email address. Avoid printing this message if it is not absolutely necessary. From usersvictoria21@example.net Tue Nov 02 10:57:33 2010 Return-Path: <usersvictoria21@example.net> Delivered-To: victoria21@example.net Received: (qmail 26288 invoked from network); 2 Nov 2010 10:57:33 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by 83.161.120.155 with SMTP; 2 Nov 2010 10:57:33 -0000 Received: (qmail 66180 invoked by uid 500); 2 Nov 2010 10:58:04 -0000 Delivered-To: victoria21@example.net Received: (qmail 65293 invoked by uid 500); 2 Nov 2010 10:58:02 -0000 Mailing-List: contact victoria21@example.net; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: <mailto:victoria21@example.net> List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:victoria21@example.net> List-Post: <mailto:victoria21@example.net> List-Id: <users.activemq.apache.org> Reply-To: victoria21@example.net Delivered-To: mailing list victoria21@example.net Received: (qmail 65285 invoked by uid 99); 2 Nov 2010 10:58:01 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 02 Nov 2010 10:58:01 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=2.0 required=10.0 tests=FREEMAIL_FROM,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_NEUTRAL,T_TO_NO_BRKTS_FREEMAIL,URI_HEX X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: neutral (athena.apache.org: local policy) Received: from [83.161.120.155] (HELO kuber.nabble.com) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 02 Nov 2010 10:57:56 +0000 Received: from joe.nabble.com ([83.161.120.155]) by kuber.nabble.com with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from <victoria21@example.net>) id 1PDEYZ-0007aV-Ns for victoria21@example.net; Tue, 02 Nov 2010 03:57:35 -0700 Date: Tue, 2 Nov 2010 03:57:35 -0700 (PDT) From: brownm_uk <victoria21@example.net> To: victoria21@example.net Message-ID: <victoria21@example.net> Subject: MapMessage - theTable empty when receiving MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I've just installed version 5.4.1 on Windows and altered the ProducerTool example source code to produce MapMessages instead of TextMessages (patch for ProducerTool.java at end of this email). When I run the producer & consumer pair from Ant as per the usual instructions, I see the 'produced' messages contain the right data in 'theTable' ... [java] [Thread-2] Sending message: 'ActiveMQMapMessage {commandId = 0, responseRequired = false, messageId = null, originalDestination = null, originalTransactionId = null, producerId = null, destination = null, transactionId = null, expiration = 0, timestamp = 0, arrival = 0, brokerInTime = 0, brokerOutTime = 0, correlationId = null, replyTo = null, persistent = false, type = null, priority = 0, groupID = null, groupSequence = 0, targetConsumerId = null, compressed = false, userID = null, content = null, marshalledProperties = null, dataStructure = null, redeliveryCounter = 0, size = 0, properties = null, readOnlyProperties = false, readOnlyBody = false, droppable = false} ActiveMQMapMessage{ theTable = {id=0} }' but in the 'consumed' messages 'theTable' appears empty ... [java] [Thread-2] Received: 'ActiveMQMapMessage {commandId = 5, responseRequired = false, messageId = ID:pcdelldevmb-64173-1288693987697-0:0:1:1:1, originalDestination = null, originalTransactionId = null, producerId = ID:pcdelldevmb-64173-1288693987697-0:0:1:1, destination = queue://TEST.FOO, transactionId = null, expiration = 0, timestamp = 1288693988050, arrival = 0, brokerInTime = 1288693988050, brokerOutTime = 1288693988051, correlationId = null, replyTo = null, persistent = false, type = null, priority = 4, groupID = null, groupSequence = 0, targetConsumerId = null, compressed = false, userID = null, content = org.apache.activemq.util.ByteSequence@1d225a7, marshalledProperties = null, dataStructure = null, redeliveryCounter = 0, size = 0, properties = null, readOnlyProperties = true, readOnlyBody = true, droppable = false} ActiveMQMapMessage{ theTable = {} }' Any ideas as to why this is happening and how I can receive the correct Map data in a MapMessage? Thanks in advance, Martin Brown --- ProducerTool.java.orig 2010-11-01 15:41:11.746392100 +0000 +++ ProducerTool.java 2010-11-02 08:58:59.572244500 +0000 @@ -22,6 +22,7 @@ import javax.jms.Connection; import javax.jms.DeliveryMode; import javax.jms.Destination; +import javax.jms.MapMessage; import javax.jms.MessageProducer; import javax.jms.Session; import javax.jms.TextMessage; @@ -154,14 +155,17 @@ for (int i = 0; i < messageCount || messageCount == 0; i++) { - TextMessage message = session.createTextMessage(createMessageText(i)); + // TextMessage message = session.createTextMessage(createMessageText(i)); + MapMessage message = session.createMapMessage(); + message.setInt("id", i); if (verbose) { - String msg = message.getText(); - if (msg.length() > 50) { - msg = msg.substring(0, 50) + "..."; - } - System.out.println("[" + this.getName() + "] Sending message: '" + msg + "'"); + // String msg = message.getText(); + // if (msg.length() > 50) { + // msg = msg.substring(0, 50) + "..."; + // } + // System.out.println("[" + this.getName() + "] Sending message: '" + msg + "'"); + System.out.println("[" + this.getName() + "] Sending message: '" + message + "'"); } producer.send(message); -- View this message in context: http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/MapMessage-theTable-empty-when-receiving-tp3023521p3023521.html Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailing list victoria21@example.net. From usersvictoria21@example.net Tue Nov 02 13:48:55 2010 Return-Path: <usersvictoria21@example.net> Delivered-To: victoria21@example.net Received: (qmail 11103 invoked from network); 2 Nov 2010 13:48:55 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by 83.161.120.155 with SMTP; 2 Nov 2010 13:48:55 -0000 Received: (qmail 84518 invoked by uid 500); 2 Nov 2010 13:49:26 -0000 Delivered-To: victoria21@example.net Received: (qmail 84239 invoked by uid 500); 2 Nov 2010 13:49:23 -0000 Mailing-List: contact victoria21@example.net; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: <mailto:victoria21@example.net> List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:victoria21@example.net> List-Post: <mailto:victoria21@example.net> List-Id: <users.activemq.apache.org> Reply-To: victoria21@example.net Delivered-To: mailing list victoria21@example.net Received: (qmail 84221 invoked by uid 99); 2 Nov 2010 13:49:22 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 02 Nov 2010 13:49:22 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=2.2 required=10.0 tests=HTML_MESSAGE,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of victoria21@example.net designates 83.161.120.155 as permitted sender) Received: from [83.161.120.155] (HELO mail1.homeawaycorp.eu) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 02 Nov 2010 13:49:18 +0000 Received: from pps.filterd (lon-sun-mgw01 [83.161.120.155]) by lon-sun-mgw01.wvrgroup.internal (8.14.3/8.14.3) with SMTP id oA2Dmnpk023438 for <victoria21@example.net>; Tue, 2 Nov 2010 13:48:56 GMT Received: from lon-sun-mail01.wvrgroup.internal (lon-sun-mail01.wvrgroup.internal [83.161.120.155]) by lon-sun-mgw01.wvrgroup.internal with ESMTP id sagtkakpa-1 for <victoria21@example.net>; Tue, 02 Nov 2010 13:48:55 +0000 Thread-Index: Act6lLFSdcIHqVxCQcScaEnfvYMd2A== Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-class: urn:content-classes:message Received: from [83.161.120.155] ([83.161.120.155]) by lon-sun-mail01.wvrgroup.internal with Microsoft SMTPSVC(343)752-6350); Tue, 2 Nov 2010 13:48:55 +0000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.3790.4721 Importance: normal Priority: normal Message-ID: <victoria21@example.net> From: "Maciej Rakowicz" <victoria21@example.net> To: <victoria21@example.net> In-Reply-To: <victoria21@example.net> Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail-16--986594291" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Virtual Topic and missed messages gone missing with selectorAware=true Date: Tue, 2 Nov 2010 13:48:54 +0000 References: <victoria21@example.net> <victoria21@example.net> <victoria21@example.net> <victoria21@example.net> <victoria21@example.net> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.935.3) X-OriginalArrivalTime: 02 Nov 2010 13:48:55.0502 (UTC) FILETIME=[B11716E0:01CB7A94] X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10432:5.2.15,1.0.148,0.0.0000 definitions=2010-11-02_07:2010-11-02,2010-11-02,1970-01-01 signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 spamscore=0 ipscore=0 suspectscore=1 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx engine=5.0.0-1005130000 definitions=main-1011020081 --Apple-Mail-16--986594291 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; delsp=yes; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Ok, i do have a somewhat contrived workaround. Basically, I decided to cache selector string of any queue subscription (well vtopic queue) that I intercept (BrokerFilter). Then I have modified org .apache .activemq.broker.region.virtual.SelectorAwareVirtualTopicInterceptor so that if there is no subscription for a destination (here we talk about queue rather than vtopic again) it tries looking it up in the cache - well, just the selector string as it's all I need, plus due to the way cache is distributed it has to be easily serializable. It compiles the selector and tries to match it against MessageEvaluationContext. Of course this works with several assumptions in mind. First, I need this consumer to be connected at least once (that's when I can cache its selector). Secondly, selector <-> queue is 1-to-1 relation. That's perfectly acceptable in my setup. m. On 1 Nov 2010, at 12:16, Sven Vintges wrote: > Perhaps a work-around would be to create a garbage-service. Ie. a > services that pops off all messages not needed by the consumer to / > dev/null? Though you probably don't know which messages are not > needed by the subscriber since you don't know which subscribers you > will have... Perhaps you could create an algorithm that does > something like "if the consumer is up and the message is older than > xxx time" pop it off? > > On Mon, 1 Nov 2010 10:25:40 +0000, "Maciej Rakowicz" <victoria21@example.net > > wrote: >> in case of selectorAware=true and consumer down, what happens to >> those messages? are they discarded? Is there anything sent to one of >> the advisories? I can't seem to find it anywhere. >> >> On 1 Nov 2010, at 09:48, Maciej Rakowicz wrote: >> >>> I guess, only if we keep downtimes short enough so 'matched' >>> messages don't expire and big enough maxPageSize or something to >>> keep matched messages consumed. >>> >>> Does anyone know if this (i.e. AMQ-3004) is going to be worked on >>> in the near future? >>> >>> m. >>> >>> On 1 Nov 2010, at 09:32, Gary Tully wrote: >>> >>>> Message expiry may help in the short term, set a time to live on >>>> the >>>> messages such that the built up unmatched messages expire and are >>>> removed. >>>> >>>> On 1 November 2010 09:20, Maciej Rakowicz >>>> <victoria21@example.net> wrote: >>>>> All, >>>>> >>>>> amq 5.4.0. jdk 1.6 >>>>> >>>>> Scenario: >>>>> broker persistence=true, selectorAware=false >>>>> Virtual Topic with say one queue. There is a consumer A >>>>> connected to that >>>>> queue with a selector. All works fine. Consumer A dies, >>>>> messages pile up, >>>>> consumer A starts back up, missed messages are redelivered. You >>>>> can easily >>>>> verify that queue receives all posted messages while consumer's >>>>> down. >>>>> Now, adding consumer B, since selectorAware=false and consumer >>>>> B uses an >>>>> exclusive selector messages sent to consumer A are not consumed >>>>> by consumer >>>>> B. All good save the fact that all unmatched messages end up >>>>> polluting >>>>> consumer's B queue. All according to the documentation. >>>>> Flipping selectorAware to true solves one problem but >>>>> introduces another >>>>> (way more important in my setup). Unmatched messages won't pile >>>>> up on >>>>> consumer's B queue which is fine. However, if consumer A dies >>>>> they are not >>>>> sent to consumer's A queue (disappearing after reaching the >>>>> topic - I dunno >>>>> where they go) hence disabling any missed message delivery on >>>>> consumer's A >>>>> startup. >>>>> >>>>> I there any way around it? I really need to handle all missed >>>>> messages with >>>>> no exception. At the same time I cannot allow stacking up >>>>> messages in each >>>>> and every queue although they are not matched. >>>>> >>>>> Btw. I do not have a list of consumers in advance, the >>>>> subscription is fully >>>>> dynamic, although since broker runs persistence, once subscribed >>>>> I do have >>>>> an idea of who's subscribed even if connection is currently down. >>>>> >>>>> I would appreciate any hints. >>>>> >>>>> mac >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- http://blog.garytully.com >>>> http://fusesource.com >>> > --Apple-Mail-16--986594291-- From usersvictoria21@example.net Tue Nov 02 13:53:19 2010 Return-Path: <usersvictoria21@example.net> Delivered-To: victoria21@example.net Received: (qmail 13189 invoked from network); 2 Nov 2010 13:53:19 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by 83.161.120.155 with SMTP; 2 Nov 2010 13:53:19 -0000 Received: (qmail 93345 invoked by uid 500); 2 Nov 2010 13:53:50 -0000 Delivered-To: victoria21@example.net Received: (qmail 93209 invoked by uid 500); 2 Nov 2010 13:53:48 -0000 Mailing-List: contact victoria21@example.net; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: <mailto:victoria21@example.net> List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:victoria21@example.net> List-Post: <mailto:victoria21@example.net> List-Id: <users.activemq.apache.org> Reply-To: victoria21@example.net Delivered-To: mailing list victoria21@example.net Received: (qmail 93201 invoked by uid 99); 2 Nov 2010 13:53:48 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 02 Nov 2010 13:53:48 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.7 required=10.0 tests=FREEMAIL_FROM,SPF_NEUTRAL,T_TO_NO_BRKTS_FREEMAIL X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: neutral (athena.apache.org: 83.161.120.155 is neither permitted nor denied by domain of victoria21@example.net) Received: from [83.161.120.155] (HELO beatrix.epiuse.co.za) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 02 Nov 2010 13:53:43 +0000 Received: from [83.161.120.155] by beatrix.epiuse.co.za with esmtpsa (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from <victoria21@example.net>) id 1PDHIQ-0002Yn-RG for victoria21@example.net; Tue, 02 Nov 2010 15:53:09 +0200 Message-ID: <victoria21@example.net> Date: Tue, 02 Nov 2010 15:51:38 +0200 From: Roelof Naude <victoria21@example.net> User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:83.161.120.155) Gecko/20100907 Fedora/3.0.7-1.fc12 Lightning/1.0b2pre Thunderbird/3.0.7 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: victoria21@example.net Subject: Re: Virtual Topic and missed messages gone missing with selectorAware=true References: <victoria21@example.net> <victoria21@example.net> <victoria21@example.net> <victoria21@example.net> <victoria21@example.net> <victoria21@example.net> In-Reply-To: <victoria21@example.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit hi maciej, that sounds interesting. would you mind sharing the filter and changes to SelectorAwareVirtualTopicInterceptor? On 11/02/2010 03:48 PM, Maciej Rakowicz wrote: > Ok, i do have a somewhat contrived workaround. Basically, I decided to > cache selector string of any queue subscription (well vtopic queue) > that I intercept (BrokerFilter). Then I have modified > org > .apache > .activemq.broker.region.virtual.SelectorAwareVirtualTopicInterceptor > so that if there is no subscription for a destination (here we talk > about queue rather than vtopic again) it tries looking it up in the > cache - well, just the selector string as it's all I need, plus due to > the way cache is distributed it has to be easily serializable. It > compiles the selector and tries to match it against > MessageEvaluationContext. Of course this works with several > assumptions in mind. First, I need this consumer to be connected at > least once (that's when I can cache its selector). Secondly, selector > <-> queue is 1-to-1 relation. That's perfectly acceptable in my setup. > > m. > > On 1 Nov 2010, at 12:16, Sven Vintges wrote: > >> Perhaps a work-around would be to create a garbage-service. Ie. a >> services that pops off all messages not needed by the consumer to / >> dev/null? Though you probably don't know which messages are not >> needed by the subscriber since you don't know which subscribers you >> will have... Perhaps you could create an algorithm that does >> something like "if the consumer is up and the message is older than >> xxx time" pop it off? >> >> On Mon, 1 Nov 2010 10:25:40 +0000, "Maciej Rakowicz"<victoria21@example.net >>> wrote: >>> in case of selectorAware=true and consumer down, what happens to >>> those messages? are they discarded? Is there anything sent
{'source': 'Apache Software Foundation Public Mail Archives'}