activemq-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From magellings <mark.gelli...@qg.com>
Subject Re: ActiveMQ 5.4.1 slower than ActiveMQ 5.2???
Date Thu, 18 Nov 2010 21:12:36 GMT

Found the culprit!!!  Failover transport options for the NMS provider changed
to require a "transport" prefix.  This appears to have been a breaking
change from an early version of the provider.

This:

?AsyncConnect=true

now has to be this:

?transport.AsyncConnect=true

Otherwise, with .NET, if the first host is the slave it takes about 20s
before the socket connection attempt times out and it moves on to the next
host in the list.  AsyncConnect tries to connect to all the hosts at once.

Speaking of breaking changes, how are they communicated to developers?  This
change also affected reconnect behavior.  So for example, the *Reconnect*
options now require the transport prefix too.

&transport.MaxReconnectAttempts=6&transport.ReconnectDelay=20&transport.UseExponentialBackoff=false

-- 
View this message in context: http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/ActiveMQ-5-4-1-slower-than-ActiveMQ-5-2-tp3048866p3049590.html
Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

Mime
View raw message