activemq-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Robbie Gemmell <robbie.gemm...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: ActiveMQ does not seem to honor the agreed upon idle-time-out
Date Fri, 23 Oct 2015 09:21:49 GMT
On 22 October 2015 at 17:21, mbroadst <mbroadst@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Tim,
> Okay, I'm going by section 2.4.5 of the spec here where it indicates: "At
> connection open each peer communicates the maximum period between activity
> (frames) on the connection that it desires from its partner." Then in
> section 2.4.1 we have: " After establishing or accepting a TCP connection
> and sending the protocol header, each peer MUST send an open frame before
> sending any other frames. The open frame describes the capabilities and
> limits of that peer". This is where my concept of a handshake (or
> "agreement", if you will) came from.
>

Tim is correct that the values are independent, since peers dont
necessarily need to wait for the others Open etc frames to arrive
before they send theirs. A 'broker' peer might, but it doesnt have to.

> I can confirm that our client sends out an Open performative with our
> desired timeout in it (120s), and ActiveMQ responds with a corresponding
> Open performative with exactly the same value I send (so 120s in this case).
> From my perspective this would appear that ActiveMQ has "agreed" to the
> terms of the idle timeout and should therefore use that value for its
> internal bookkeeping. Nowhere in this initial connection setup does the
> value 30s appear (or rater 30000 for ms), ActiveMQ just seems to send back
> the same idle-time-out value I send.
>
> I have fairly verbose frame traces if that would be of assistance on your
> side?
>
>

Certainly in recent codebase, the broker only seems to use its own
config to drive its advertised idle-timeout, defaulting to 30sec. It
only seems to look at the remote peers requested value at all while it
is checking that the 'inactivity monitor' used to do the work isn't
disabled (meaning it wouldnt be able to send any heartbeats, so it
then fails the connection attempt).

I might have missed it, but I can't see mention of which ActiveMQ
version you are using. It could be that is important.

>
> --
> View this message in context: http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/ActiveMQ-does-not-seem-to-honor-the-agreed-upon-idle-time-out-tp4703244p4703290.html
> Sent from the ActiveMQ - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

Mime
View raw message