Mailing-List: contact users-help@activemq.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: users@activemq.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of chubrilo@gmail.com designates
 209.85.220.225 as permitted sender)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
        d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
        h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date
         :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type;
        b=X//bIO1vOKlzYEDRoGcDom1OnYfkt2IVA/RNNwaFZXKwb1addTEd/VKFfFfJshA9PY
         139oS3CkdCWUY4PjFQp2z72+IpsDJCvWZp/Vrc04HUrnwDA46j7qysTfZGkOLVaoaLEB
         kvSCZ1W6A8Cv6Y0fFrerotGW40w9Zy4eyixQg=
MIME-Version: 1.0
Sender: chubrilo@gmail.com
In-Reply-To: <slrnhg2l19.8ei.fredrik@scout.jonson.org>
References: <26340339.post@talk.nabble.com> <26368295.post@talk.nabble.com>
	 <36e91d9d0911160052ud4dc0e2sc6c5801d8e691ff7@mail.gmail.com>
	 <slrnhg2l19.8ei.fredrik@scout.jonson.org>
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2009 14:59:59 +0100
Message-ID: <36e91d9d0911160559v304511bdr2cd5228dd83eead0@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: ActiveMQ 5.3.0 OutOfMemoryError
From: Dejan Bosanac <dejan@nighttale.net>
To: users@activemq.apache.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=00151744843ad6b28304787d6c8e

--00151744843ad6b28304787d6c8e
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

Hi Fredrik,

Activemq 5.3.1 should be released very soon.
We'll try to improve the release cycle, so next major release don't take too
much as well.

Cheers
--
Dejan Bosanac - http://twitter.com/dejanb

Open Source Integration - http://fusesource.com/
ActiveMQ in Action - http://www.manning.com/snyder/
Blog - http://www.nighttale.net


On Mon, Nov 16, 2009 at 2:31 PM, Fredrik Jonson <fredrik@jonson.org> wrote:

> Dejan Bosanac wrote:
>
> >  yes that one should solve it. Can you try the latest snapshot and
> confirm if
> >  problem still exists?
>
> This seems to be a common and serious problem. Any chance of seing a minor
> 5.3.x
> bugfix only release with AMQ-2481 included anytime soon?
>
> Almost a year passed between 5.2 and 5.3 and personally I'm really not too
> happy
> about putting snapshot "releases" in production.
>
> How does everyone else cope with this? Do you use internally "blessed"
> snapshot
> releases in production, or builds from stable release tag plus selected
> patches?
>
> --
> Fredrik Jonson
>
>

--00151744843ad6b28304787d6c8e--