Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-activemq-users-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 20833 invoked from network); 18 Nov 2010 21:12:35 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.3) by 140.211.11.9 with SMTP; 18 Nov 2010 21:12:35 -0000 Received: (qmail 26802 invoked by uid 500); 18 Nov 2010 21:13:04 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-activemq-users-archive@activemq.apache.org Received: (qmail 26784 invoked by uid 500); 18 Nov 2010 21:13:04 -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 26776 invoked by uid 99); 18 Nov 2010 21:13:04 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (140.211.11.136) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 18 Nov 2010 21:13:04 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=2.0 required=10.0 tests=SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_NEUTRAL,URI_HEX X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: neutral (athena.apache.org: local policy) Received: from [216.139.236.158] (HELO kuber.nabble.com) (216.139.236.158) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 18 Nov 2010 21:12:58 +0000 Received: from joe.nabble.com ([192.168.236.151]) by kuber.nabble.com with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1PJBmW-0007N7-JO for users@activemq.apache.org; Thu, 18 Nov 2010 13:12:36 -0800 Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2010 13:12:36 -0800 (PST) From: magellings To: users@activemq.apache.org Message-ID: <1290114756594-3049590.post@n4.nabble.com> In-Reply-To: <1290095619636-3048967.post@n4.nabble.com> References: <1290092776466-3048866.post@n4.nabble.com> <1290093906808-3048914.post@n4.nabble.com> <1290095619636-3048967.post@n4.nabble.com> Subject: Re: ActiveMQ 5.4.1 slower than ActiveMQ 5.2??? MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit 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.