activemq-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Gary Tully <>
Subject Re: 5.1.0 -> 5.3.1 upgrade questions.
Date Fri, 23 Apr 2010 09:18:56 GMT
Two things to note.
1) The default persistence adapter in 5.3.1 is different from 5.1.0 so you
will need to drain all persistence destinations before migration or
explicitly configure a matching persistence adapter to maintain the existing
2) There have been a couple of wireformat (the client
broker protocol version) updates between 5.1.0 and 5.3.1 so you will need to
update your clients activemq jars to take advantage of the features/fixes
that precipitated these wire format changes. If you do not, negotiation will
result in the lowest common denominator feature set being used.

On 22 April 2010 21:56, <> wrote:

> I have been tasked with maintenance of our ActiveMQ install on Windows,
> after its previous maintainer left the company. Let me say, up front, that I
> am brand new to it and am working to come up to speed on it, so please bear
> with me, if I should sound clueless.
> We are running version 5.1.0. It would appear that our installation is
> virtually an out-of-the-zip install, with only two minor edits to the
> activemq.xml file (I diffed our 5.1.0 directory tree against a pristine
> download of it):
> <managementContext>
>    <managementContext createConnector="true"/>
> </managementContext>
> whereas in the pristine copy it is set to false, and:
> <!-- <route>
>    <from uri="activemq:example.A"/>
>    <to uri="activemq:example.B"/>
> </route> -->
> whereas in the pristine copy this is uncommented.
> I've been tasked with upgrading to 5.3.1 and being able to roll back to
> this version if need be. Looking at the changelogs for the version after
> 5.1.0, I see that much has changed.
> My first question is this: if I make these same two changes to the 5.3.1
> configuration (the first in activemq.xml and the second in camel.xml, since
> that's now split off), is 5.3.1 a drop in replacement for 5.1.0, that will
> simply 'just work' in the same way without any of our stuff that uses it
> noticing any difference at all?
> Secondly, if we ran into trouble, could I just shutdown the 5.3.1 service,
> restart the 5.1.0 service and just be back in business again?
> Thank you, in advance, for your time and comments.
> -ste
> This message is for the designated recipient only and may contain
> privileged, proprietary, or otherwise private information.  If you have
> received it in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete the
> original.  Any other use of the email by you is prohibited.


Open Source Integration

  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message