activemq-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Timothy Bish <tab...@fusesource.com>
Subject Re: ActiveMQ 5.4.1 slower than ActiveMQ 5.2???
Date Thu, 18 Nov 2010 21:19:57 GMT
On Thu, 2010-11-18 at 13:12 -0800, magellings wrote:
> 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


I believe this was documented in this issue:
https://issues.apache.org/activemq/browse/AMQNET-274

Regards

-- 
Tim Bish
------------
FuseSource
Email: tim.bish@fusesource.com
Web: http://fusesource.com
Twitter: tabish121
Blog: http://timbish.blogspot.com/



Mime
View raw message