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 77E061180F for ; Wed, 6 Aug 2014 16:19:54 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 81347 invoked by uid 500); 6 Aug 2014 16:19:53 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-activemq-users-archive@activemq.apache.org Received: (qmail 81301 invoked by uid 500); 6 Aug 2014 16:19:53 -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 81288 invoked by uid 99); 6 Aug 2014 16:19:53 -0000 Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (192.87.106.230) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 06 Aug 2014 16:19:53 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=2.0 required=5.0 tests=SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_NEUTRAL,URI_HEX X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: neutral (nike.apache.org: local policy) Received: from [162.253.133.43] (HELO mwork.nabble.com) (162.253.133.43) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 06 Aug 2014 16:19:51 +0000 Received: from mjoe.nabble.com (unknown [162.253.133.57]) by mwork.nabble.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EC13931563B for ; Wed, 6 Aug 2014 09:16:19 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 6 Aug 2014 09:19:24 -0700 (PDT) From: artnaseef To: users@activemq.apache.org Message-ID: <1407341964163-4684193.post@n4.nabble.com> In-Reply-To: <1407339585518-4684192.post@n4.nabble.com> References: <1407264685560-4684129.post@n4.nabble.com> <1407269112977-4684130.post@n4.nabble.com> <1407270766692-4684134.post@n4.nabble.com> <1407271475951-4684135.post@n4.nabble.com> <1407274388280-4684142.post@n4.nabble.com> <1407282730826-4684149.post@n4.nabble.com> <1407284011400-4684150.post@n4.nabble.com> <1407285192996-4684151.post@n4.nabble.com> <1407339585518-4684192.post@n4.nabble.com> Subject: Re: JMS to JMS Bridge Connection MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org For keep-alive packets, I was referring to the inactivity monitor and not TCP keep-alive packets. The documentation is correct - the default is not to enable TCP keep-alive packets on the socket. I don't think there is any conflict between the two. One thought is coming to mind here after re-reading the posts. Is it possible a transaction is involved here? Is JTA in-use on the JVMs with these embedded brokers? If there are transactions, that could explain the failure to send messages and why only a certain number of messages are ever consumed. To clarify, sends in a transaction only take effect after the commit, and receives are only acknowledged on commit. Note that the connection factory setup in the posted activemq configs are not explicitly using transactions, which is good. Transactions could also explain an apparent lack of resumed flow on reconnect - the consumer would receive the same messages again on every reconnect and would stop at the same point. One way to tell - try the same setup with a stand-alone broker using the configs provided to see if it has the same problems. -- View this message in context: http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/JMS-to-JMS-Bridge-Connection-tp4684129p4684193.html Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.