From users-return-29182-apmail-activemq-users-archive=activemq.apache.org@activemq.apache.org Tue Nov 1 11:15:47 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: apmail-activemq-users-archive@www.apache.org Delivered-To: apmail-activemq-users-archive@www.apache.org Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id BDEF972D7 for ; Tue, 1 Nov 2011 11:15:47 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 49799 invoked by uid 500); 1 Nov 2011 11:15:47 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-activemq-users-archive@activemq.apache.org Received: (qmail 49696 invoked by uid 500); 1 Nov 2011 11:15:46 -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 49687 invoked by uid 99); 1 Nov 2011 11:15:46 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (140.211.11.136) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 01 Nov 2011 11:15:46 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.7 required=5.0 tests=FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of gary.tully@gmail.com designates 209.85.216.178 as permitted sender) Received: from [209.85.216.178] (HELO mail-qy0-f178.google.com) (209.85.216.178) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 01 Nov 2011 11:15:41 +0000 Received: by qyg36 with SMTP id 36so8580684qyg.2 for ; Tue, 01 Nov 2011 04:15:20 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; bh=p/8oLg0rwjSxvV6udl3FXRMzRGQTyjWXbSdYOp/UFV4=; b=MbgPvd1HBiobtP7MxfepMv6HmMFzncNmntM7BVRwEz9fNIq19EOJgb+QnKkP5A0og0 d2WvUwNJoaGHTZfhRlVb6oLLThQY1HhSYN0Ee36LCfBWDQ9tzuKUN378zTTKBGRZQxQx CSprOq+bIC7ioGcN7YscN7ShqSA2mBANc95KE= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.229.73.13 with SMTP id o13mr3472605qcj.159.1320146120523; Tue, 01 Nov 2011 04:15:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.229.166.198 with HTTP; Tue, 1 Nov 2011 04:15:20 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <2099453.7edd.13358a341d7.Coremail.suonayi2006@163.com> References: <2099453.7edd.13358a341d7.Coremail.suonayi2006@163.com> Date: Tue, 1 Nov 2011 11:15:20 +0000 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Does tracking messages may cause reduplicate messages? From: Gary Tully To: users@activemq.apache.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 in the case of failover with a pending send, so a message send where the reply from the broker is lost, the state tracker with tracking enabled, will resend the message on a reconnect. If the message is already in the store, the producerAudit persisted by the store will detect the duplicate send and ignore it. so, yes it is. See the org.apache.activemq.transport.failover.FailoverTransactionTest for a unit test that simulates this. 2011/10/31 SuoNayi : > Hi all, is it possible to cause the client to send reduplicate messages to broker when enable tracking messages? -- http://fusesource.com http://blog.garytully.com