activemq-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Christian Posta <christian.po...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Clarifcation on KahaDB support for message priority is needed
Date Thu, 21 Mar 2013 19:03:09 GMT
yep, good point. from here:

https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AMQ-2790




On Thu, Mar 21, 2013 at 11:42 AM, Gary Tully <gary.tully@gmail.com> wrote:

> prefetch is relevant here. the pending cursor on the client has priority
> support[0-9] so x prefetched messages with priority [0-5] will get
> reordered on the client.
> with prefetch=0, the order will be fifo.
>
> Note: the jdbc store does priority order [0-9]
>
>
> On 21 March 2013 15:38, mikmela <mikmela@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > The  http://activemq.apache.org/how-can-i-support-priority-queues.html
> > <http://activemq.apache.org/how-can-i-support-priority-queues.html>
>  says
> > that
> > *For KahaDB three priority levels are supported, Low (<5), Default (=5)
> and
> > High (>5).*.
> > However, our tests show that messages with different priorities in the
> > range
> > < 5 (Low) where processed by consumer in proper order, not FIFO as we
> > thought... Does it mean that desription is not uup-do-date and it was
> > addressed at some point?
> > Just want to make sure that we can rely on this behaviour and it not a
> some
> > side effect?
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > View this message in context:
> >
> http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/Clarifcation-on-KahaDB-support-for-message-priority-is-needed-tp4665014.html
> > Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
> >
>
>
>
> --
> http://redhat.com
> http://blog.garytully.com
>



-- 
*Christian Posta*
http://www.christianposta.com/blog
twitter: @christianposta

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message