activemq-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From James Green <james.mk.gr...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: DLQ, cause:null
Date Fri, 24 Apr 2015 13:39:27 GMT
I've added the following, "A client connection times out (perhaps the code
being executed takes longer than the configured time-out period)," to the
list of reasons on
http://activemq.apache.org/message-redelivery-and-dlq-handling.html (should
appear shortly).

If someone can think of more precise wording, go ahead and update but the
performance of the system would appear to be an important factor that
people should be aware of.

On 24 April 2015 at 14:31, James Green <james.mk.green@gmail.com> wrote:

> We have set the receive() timeout to 10s via the url - no DLQ issues for
> the past few hours, we'll wait until middle of next week before we're
> really confident.
>
> Does not explain why things on the machine appear slow at times just helps
> us deal with them.
>
> On 24 April 2015 at 11:57, Gary Tully <gary.tully@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> to avoid the redelivered messages getting sent to the DLQ, changing
>> the default redelivery policy max from 6 to infinite will help.
>>
>> You can do this in the brokerurl passed to the jms connection factory,
>> it may also make sense to reduce the prefetch if consumers come and go
>> without consuming the prefetch, which seems to be the case.
>>
>>
>> tcp://..:61616?jms.prefetchPolicy.all=100&jms.redeliveryPolicy.maximumRedeliveries=-1
>>
>> On 23 April 2015 at 17:14, James Green <james.mk.green@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > Hi,
>> >
>> > We are not overriding so the defaults of 1s timeout on the receive() and
>> > 1,000 prefetch are in play.
>> >
>> > We are updating the connection URI to set a much higher timeout.
>> >
>> > Interestingly, PHP sending to the very same broker via STOMP gets send()
>> > fail with a 2 second timeout specified. With a 10 second timeout the
>> > frequency of this is reduced.
>> >
>> > I have fired up the latest hawt.io jar and connected to this broker,
>> > however the Health and Threads parts are entirely blank. The queues are
>> all
>> > visible yet "browse" of ActiveMQ.DLQ shows none of the 3,000+
>> accumulated
>> > messages. Wondering where to go next?
>> >
>> > Thanks,
>> >
>> > James
>> >
>> >
>> > On 23 April 2015 at 13:35, Gary Tully <gary.tully@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >> what sort of timeout is on the receive(...) from spring dmlc, and what
>> >> is the prefetch for that consumer. It appears that the message is
>> >> getting dispatched but not consumed, the connection/consumer dies and
>> >> the message is flagged as a redelivery. then the before delivery check
>> >> on the delivery counter kicks the message to the dlq. So this must be
>> >> happening 6 times.
>> >>
>> >> I just pushed a tidy up of some of the redelivery semantics - there
>> >> was a bug there that would cause the redelivery counter to increment
>> >> in error... so that may be relevant[1].
>> >> A short term solution would be to ensure infinite or a very large
>> >> number of redeliveries, up from the default 6. That can be provided in
>> >> the broker url.
>> >>
>> >> [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AMQ-5735
>> >>
>> >> On 23 April 2015 at 13:08, James Green <james.mk.green@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> >> > We have a camel route consuming from ActiveMQ (5.10.0 with KahaDB)
>> and
>> >> > frequently get a DLQ entry without anything logged through our
>> >> errorHandler.
>> >> >
>> >> > The only thing we have to go on is a dlqFailureCause header which
>> says:
>> >> >
>> >> > java.lang.Throwable: Exceeded redelivery policy
>> limit:RedeliveryPolicy
>> >> > {destination = null, collisionAvoidanceFactor = 0.15,
>> >> maximumRedeliveries =
>> >> > 6, maximumRedeliveryDelay = -1, initialRedeliveryDelay = 1000,
>> >> > useCollisionAvoidance = false, useExponentialBackOff = false,
>> >> > backOffMultiplier = 5.0, redeliveryDelay = 1000}, cause:null
>> >> >
>> >> > These are happening apparently at random. The route is marked
>> transacted,
>> >> > and is backed by Spring Transactions itself backed by Narayana.
>> >> >
>> >> > Our debugging indicates that our route never receives the message
>> from
>> >> AMQ
>> >> > prior to it hitting the DLQ. We have switched on DEBUG logging for
>> >> > org.apache.activemq but other than being swamped with even more logs
>> >> we've
>> >> > observed nothing notable.
>> >> >
>> >> > Any ideas where to go from here? Impossible to say which of the
>> several
>> >> > thousand messages per day will go this way so an attached debugger
>> is out
>> >> > of the question.
>> >> >
>> >> > Our log4j config fragment:
>> >> >
>> >> >         <Logger name="com" level="WARN"/>
>> >> >         <Logger name="org" level="WARN"/>
>> >> >         <Logger name="org.apache.camel" level="DEBUG"/>
>> >> >         <Logger name="org.apache.activemq" level="DEBUG"/>
>> >> >         <Logger name="org.springframework.orm.jpa" level="DEBUG"/>
>> >> >         <Logger name="org.springframework.transaction"
>> level="DEBUG"/>
>> >> >
>> >> > Thanks,
>> >> >
>> >> > James
>> >>
>>
>
>

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