activemq-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Rob Davies <rajdav...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: memory usage dead lock?
Date Tue, 13 May 2008 15:26:19 GMT

On 13 May 2008, at 16:08, Filip Hanik - Dev Lists wrote:

> Rob Davies wrote:
>>
>> On 12 May 2008, at 19:28, Filip Hanik - Dev Lists wrote:
>>
>>> I am publishing to a temporary topic, producing fast, consuming slow
>>> after a while the memory usage kicks in on the server.
>>>
>>> if I disconnect the consumer/producer (ie, kill the client) the  
>>> server remains stuck in this state, and nothing gets cleaned up,  
>>> and the server is unusable.
>>>
>>> Is this a known issue? should I open a JIRA?
>>>
>>> ActiveMQ 5.0.0
>>>
>>> Filip
>>>
>>> "ActiveMQ Transport: tcp:///127.0.0.1:2247" daemon prio=4  
>>> tid=0x02ebc538 nid=0x1d08 in Object.wait() [0x040af000..0x040a
>>> fc68]
>>>      at java.lang.Object.wait(Native Method)
>>>      - waiting on <0x230d49a0> (a java.lang.Object)
>>>      at  
>>> org 
>>> .apache.activemq.usage.MemoryUsage.waitForSpace(MemoryUsage.java:85)
>>>      - locked <0x230d49a0> (a java.lang.Object)
>>>      at  
>>> org 
>>> .apache.activemq.usage.MemoryUsage.waitForSpace(MemoryUsage.java:79)
>>>      at org.apache.activemq.broker.region.Topic.send(Topic.java:354)
>>>      at  
>>> org 
>>> .apache 
>>> .activemq.broker.region.AbstractRegion.send(AbstractRegion.java:328)
>>>      at  
>>> org 
>>> .apache.activemq.broker.region.RegionBroker.send(RegionBroker.java: 
>>> 402)
>>>      at  
>>> org 
>>> .apache 
>>> .activemq.broker.TransactionBroker.send(TransactionBroker.java:224)
>>>      at  
>>> org.apache.activemq.broker.BrokerFilter.send(BrokerFilter.java:125)
>>>      at  
>>> org 
>>> .apache 
>>> .activemq 
>>> .broker 
>>> .CompositeDestinationBroker.send(CompositeDestinationBroker.java:95)
>>>      at  
>>> org.apache.activemq.broker.BrokerFilter.send(BrokerFilter.java:125)
>>>      at  
>>> org 
>>> .apache 
>>> .activemq.broker.MutableBrokerFilter.send(MutableBrokerFilter.java: 
>>> 135)
>>>      at  
>>> org 
>>> .apache 
>>> .activemq 
>>> .broker 
>>> .TransportConnection.processMessage(TransportConnection.java:434)
>>>      at  
>>> org 
>>> .apache 
>>> .activemq.command.ActiveMQMessage.visit(ActiveMQMessage.java:623)
>>>      at  
>>> org 
>>> .apache 
>>> .activemq 
>>> .broker.TransportConnection.service(TransportConnection.java:281)
>>>      at org.apache.activemq.broker.TransportConnection 
>>> $1.onCommand(TransportConnection.java:178)
>>>      at  
>>> org 
>>> .apache 
>>> .activemq.transport.TransportFilter.onCommand(TransportFilter.java: 
>>> 67)
>>>      at  
>>> org 
>>> .apache 
>>> .activemq 
>>> .transport 
>>> .WireFormatNegotiator.onCommand(WireFormatNegotiator.java:134)
>>>      at  
>>> org 
>>> .apache 
>>> .activemq 
>>> .transport.InactivityMonitor.onCommand(InactivityMonitor.java:138)
>>>      - locked <0x231a3878> (a  
>>> org.apache.activemq.transport.InactivityMonitor$1)
>>>      at  
>>> org 
>>> .apache 
>>> .activemq 
>>> .transport.TransportSupport.doConsume(TransportSupport.java:83)
>>
>>
>> This is a known issue in 5.0 - why aren't you using 5.1?
> it's simply not feasible to upgrade a production environment  
> everytime a new "stable" release comes out, and one can not  
> guarantee that no other issues are present in 5.1. one would have to  
> do a complete regression suite,
> this issue we can work around for now
>
> Filip
>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> cheers,
>>
>> Rob
>>
>> http://open.iona.com/ -Enterprise Open Integration
>> http://rajdavies.blogspot.com/
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
You could always use the FUSE versions - see here: http://open.iona.com/products/enterprise-activemq/






cheers,

Rob

http://open.iona.com/ -Enterprise Open Integration
http://rajdavies.blogspot.com/




Mime
View raw message