activemq-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Rob Davies <>
Subject Re: About releases and bugs
Date Thu, 28 Jun 2007 09:39:04 GMT
ActiveMQ is deployed and used in lots of different scenarios. Given  
the breadth of the project, its very difficult for a few people to  
cover everything - which is why we encourage folks to participate and  
help us out ;)

On Jun 28, 2007, at 4:19 AM, Tom Samplonius wrote:

>   I have to agree with most of this.  ActiveMQ is a buggy as hell.
>   In my testing, I'd have to say ActiveMQ 4.1.1 is completely  
> unusable in production.  I'm told that it is used in production  
> somewhere, but I suspect the usage is extremely narrow.  I'd like  
> to know what usage actually works.  So if you are using ActiveMQ in  
> production, how are you using it?
>   The show-stopping bugs in 4.1.1 are:
> - ActiveMQ loses unacked messages if a Stomp client disconnects  
> without an explicit DISCONNECT (fixed in 4.2-something)
> - Stomp server does not support authentication.  It is completely  
> wide-open.  And the default install has a Stomp listener running,  
> so ActiveMQ is wide open if you have Stomp enabled (there is an  
> unofficial patch, but I don't think this one will even be fixed in  
> 5.0).
>   A lot of the ActiveMQ components aren't merely buggy, but simply  
> don't work.  Authentication and security should be mandatory, but  
> the ActiveMQ.Agent feature doesn't work if auth is enabled.   
> Neither does the Web Console queueBrowser.  These components should  
> be move to a sandbox.
>   There is pretty clear theme in the ActiveMQ development.   
> Authentication and security are an afterthought.  Like seriously an  
> afterthought, as in after the release is cut.
>   I'm amazed that ActiveMQ made it out of Apache incubation.
> ----- "Manuel Teira" <> wrote:
>> Hello.
>> I will try to outline briefly our situation as activemq users:
>> We are embedding a 4.0.2 broker in our system. It is suffering some
>> problems:
>>  - Memory leaks.
>>  - Locks trying to create or delete temporary queues (AMQ-1278).  
>> Still
>> trying to reproduce it to verify this bug as fixed for us.
>>  - Inactivity exceptions in running channels, perhaps related with  
>> the
>> leaks and the GC monopolizing the CPU time.
>> We are in the process of migrating to activemq 4.1.1. In our  
>> tests, as
>> I've commented in a previous mail, we have found that:
>>   - Memory leaks are still happening, at least while creating
>> temporary
>> queues and consumers (AMQ-1297)
>> As this bug is a stopper for us, we tried, as it's usually
>> recommended,
>> with more recent snapshots, to see if the problems were fixed. So, we
>> have found, using the more recent 5.0 snapshot:
>>   - The memory leaks seems to be fixed.
>>   - Already delete messages can be browsed using the JMX console
>> (AMQ-1296)
>>   - Messages are (hardly ever, but happens) duplicated or not
>> delivered.
>> (AMQ-1295)
>>   - What seems random Inactivity exceptions in running and active
>> channels. Perhaps related with AMQ-1146.
>> So, my first question is about next releases. I think I've read
>> somewere
>> that there will be a 4.1.2 release. I suppose that generated from svn
>> branches/activemq-4.1. However, a recent fix like the one for  
>> AMQ-1146
>> (related with the inactivity IO exceptions), was not applied on this
>> branch. So, what does this mean? That this bug won't be fixed in a
>> future 4.1.x release? That there would be no more 4.1.x ?
>> In the current situation, I think that the best release for us is
>> 4.1.1,
>> if we were able to fix the leakages (5.0 found bugs are stoppers for
>> us). Any idea of what changes could have fixed that leakage?  I've
>> also
>> started to inspect the source code of the project. I  have to say
>> that,
>> at a first glance, it looks great, well-organized and very modular.
>> But
>> it's hard for a newcomer to understand the whole thing and to find  
>> out
>> where the different pieces go. Is there any guide for developers that
>> could ease the learning process ?
>> Thanks, and best regards.

View raw message