activemq-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From naql <>
Subject Yes, and it's an urgent problem [was Re: lock on Oracle activemq_lock table]
Date Wed, 10 Oct 2007 15:42:03 GMT

kmoore4now wrote:
> I'm using the journaled JDBC approach to message persistence, with Oracle.
> It seems to work well most of the time. However, I'm finding that even
> after a normal shutdown a lock occasionally appears to be held on the
> activemq_lock table. This prevents ActiveMQ from starting up again on the
> next attempt.
> Has anyone else seen this? Is there a way to avoid it?

Yes.  I'm pretty sure the problem you're describing here is the same one
that I'm running into.  I previously posted regarding this on Oct 2nd as
"ActiveMQ installed as NT service takes a long, long time to restart".  I
thought it might be related to the servicewrapper, but it happens just
running it from the prompt whenever I use Oracle jdbc persistence.  I see
these messages in the log: 

2007-10-02 17:44:50,232 [erSimpleAppMain] INFO  DefaultDatabaseLocker         
- Attempting to acquire the exclusive lock to become the Master broker
2007-10-02 19:42:06,568 [erSimpleAppMain] INFO  DefaultDatabaseLocker         
- Becoming the master on dataSource:

So, as you can see, in this example, it took 2 hours for ActiveMQ to start
up.  This doesn't happen when I fall back on the default persistence db,
comment out the Oracle datasource.  

This is a big deal to us and, along with the other issue I'm about to post
about, is a serious showstopper.

View this message in context:
Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailing list archive at

View raw message