activemq-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Timothy Bish <tabish...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Should I still use idleTimeout=0 which ActiveMQ 5.10.0 after the bug fix in ActiveMQ 5.8.0
Date Wed, 14 Jan 2015 17:04:39 GMT
On 01/13/2015 08:04 AM, xabhi wrote:
> There was this bug in ActiveMQ v 5.8.0 (
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AMQ-4366
> <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AMQ-4366>  ) which was worked around
> by setting idleTimeout to 0 in connection factory. I have upgraded my setup
> to ActiveMQ 5.10.0.
>
> I am wondering whether to keep this setting or remove it to go back to
> defaults. What could be the side-effects of setting it to 0? What will be
> the benefits of reverting back to default 30s?
>
> Thanks,
> Abhi
>
>
>
> --
> View this message in context: http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/Should-I-still-use-idleTimeout-0-which-ActiveMQ-5-10-0-after-the-bug-fix-in-ActiveMQ-5-8-0-tp4689846.html
> Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
There shouldn't be any negative effects going back to the default, 
connections that have sat idle for that time period will get cleaned up 
so if you want them to linger longer you can extend it.  Leaving it at 
zero only means that the pool will retain the open connections for its 
lifetime so as long as the max size is sensible it shouldn't present any 
real problems.

-- 
Tim Bish
Sr Software Engineer | RedHat Inc.
tim.bish@redhat.com | www.redhat.com
skype: tabish121 | twitter: @tabish121
blog: http://timbish.blogspot.com/


Mime
View raw message