Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-activemq-users-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 51850 invoked from network); 30 Aug 2010 17:08:53 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.3) by 140.211.11.9 with SMTP; 30 Aug 2010 17:08:53 -0000 Received: (qmail 77750 invoked by uid 500); 30 Aug 2010 17:08:52 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-activemq-users-archive@activemq.apache.org Received: (qmail 77688 invoked by uid 500); 30 Aug 2010 17:08:52 -0000 Mailing-List: contact users-help@activemq.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: users@activemq.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list users@activemq.apache.org Received: (qmail 77680 invoked by uid 99); 30 Aug 2010 17:08:51 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (140.211.11.136) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 30 Aug 2010 17:08:51 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=2.2 required=10.0 tests=FREEMAIL_FROM,HTML_MESSAGE,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_PASS,T_TO_NO_BRKTS_FREEMAIL X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of extsknk@gmail.com designates 209.85.161.171 as permitted sender) Received: from [209.85.161.171] (HELO mail-gx0-f171.google.com) (209.85.161.171) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 30 Aug 2010 17:08:47 +0000 Received: by gxk6 with SMTP id 6so3163584gxk.2 for ; Mon, 30 Aug 2010 10:08:27 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:received:in-reply-to :references:date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; bh=yacmr3yjKPpU80/ccoXR5gvxPXOEXWh2jkVSEDk00UE=; b=WVRm2w7SB9CxJ8Z06ik3pf1Nypjm4vtIX99ApiTDOn/O7CGn/ia41uko7OhSnkJr00 +u9ZZ4NYBKuNzTlvkPz8x6EWOVvnjSwJwXhORNJu7qHWUGNbEm8XjgkgStV8en8DazZE vujWDZ0d2cXzijJOxbkbcKXt/la0Fi3FDXVV8= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; b=uyA8XIZVJdot9vO9626y2GkkaWI85P1jrqeeiHotHL1kVdNMHGJR9WGZ0ZHNGpz6rZ /wfMma1TBxBPt4Ii7cNI4oi6GmXGuHabA0naA1yKwmHMKWzVmHFgvhQiMe+UB8qMLQsA a7pLHDPkjSeaJmgvWGRpgQnSZ3Ok1Re0ArHe0= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.90.120.12 with SMTP id s12mr3848907agc.156.1283188100921; Mon, 30 Aug 2010 10:08:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.90.166.10 with HTTP; Mon, 30 Aug 2010 10:08:20 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Mon, 30 Aug 2010 10:08:20 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Thoughts on production worthiness of 5.4 ... From: Ravi To: users@activemq.apache.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=0016361e7f08ef7a9d048f0d8281 --0016361e7f08ef7a9d048f0d8281 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Thanks Dejan. Good to hear many people are using later versions in production. I'd like to hear of any stability issues with the features of interest to us (see below), especially master/slave + Durable Topics. An indication of a release maturity might be useful - for example, 5.4 beta1, beta2 ... (means still being 'soaked') 5.4 stable (means 'may not have bleeding edge features, but has no known issues either). On Mon, Aug 30, 2010 at 1:29 AM, Dejan Bosanac wrote: > Hi Ravi, > > there has been a lot of improvements since 5.0 and many people uses > later versions in production. I'd certainly recommend testing the > latest release in your environment and report any potential problems > you might find. > > 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 Fri, Aug 27, 2010 at 8:20 PM, Ravi wrote: > > Hi, > > > > We have been using version 4.1.1 in production for the past several years > > and it has been 'rock solid'. > > Earlier we attempted to move to 5.0 and got burned badly. > > > > Can somebody comment on the stability/production worthiness of 5.4 for > the > > following features ? > > > > - Durable topics > > - Virtual destination of Topics/Queues > > - Kaha DB > > - Master/slave (especially ability to recover as documented by copying > slave > > data dir to master) > > > > (the concern is not about message rate, basic stability - ability to run > for > > months without restarts) > > > > Thank you > > Ravi > > > --0016361e7f08ef7a9d048f0d8281--