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 gcjau-user-2@m.gmane.org
 designates 80.91.229.12 as permitted sender)
To: users@activemq.apache.org
From: Aleksandar Ivanisevic <aleksandar@ivanisevic.de>
Subject: Re: STOMP order of acks?
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 2009 17:43:25 +0100
Organization: Individual
Lines: 57
Message-ID: <m3hbrp8sb6.fsf@alex.2e-systems.com>
References: <m3k4wm9ckb.fsf@alex.2e-systems.com>
 <36e91d9d0912170153g179464d1n183df8e445206417@mail.gmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Original-Sender: aleksandar@ivanisevic.de
User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.1 (gnu/linux)
Cancel-Lock: sha1:scrCMfdz05pYVb8WDg9XBRtOdXY=
Sender: news <news@ger.gmane.org>

Dejan Bosanac <dejan@nighttale.net> writes:

> Hi,
>
> it's not a but. With client ack, the ack you send will acknowledge all
> message up to the one you're sending ack for. So if you send acks
> out of order, you'll get "unexpected ack" message.

Interesting, I presume this is ActiveMQ's own interpretation of a
STOMP protocol?

is this the official protocol definition? http://stomp.codehaus.org/Protocol 

because there under ACK it doesn't mention anything about "up to" and
no matter how hard I try I couldn't see a way the spec could be
interpreted that way.

>
> You can use client-individual ack to achieve your desired
> functionality (http://issues.apache.org/activemq/browse/AMQ-1874)

IMHO, this should have been the default behaviour.

>
> 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 Thu, Dec 17, 2009 at 10:25 AM, Aleksandar Ivanisevic
> <aleksandar@ivanisevic.de> wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I have a consumer with prefetch>1 and client ack. If I send the acks
>> out of order (not in the order the messages are received), I get an
>> exception:
>>
>> org.apache.activemq.transport.stomp.ProtocolException: Unexpected ACK received for message-id
>>
>> is this in JMS specification that acks need to be received in the same
>> order or is it STOMP bug?
>>
>> If it is supposed to be like that, how is one supposed to handle
>> messages in parallel? Have a separate consumer for each thread?
>>
>> Hm, just found out that when I get this exception the message never
>> gets redelivered, so this must be a STOMP bug, right?
>>
>>
>>
>