Mailing-List: contact users-help@activemq.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: users@activemq.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of tbain98@gmail.com designates
 209.85.213.176 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Sender: tbain98@gmail.com
In-Reply-To: <vamlnapogq478t9s86vlgak4aeltsqlioj@4ax.com>
References: <qniinaln6gvnrbu94bt7t8jctq2btgj250@4ax.com>
	<CACHnxzzqpPonRn1Fnu+7Pe5f5WvAS0hH6oTJrx3fs-2nhUj9vA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CACHnxzzqpPonRn1Fnu+7Pe5f5WvAS0hH6oTJrx3fs-2nhUj9vA-JsoAwUIsXosN+BqQ9rBEUg@public.gmane.org>
	<CAPVVMa9BtMsH45SvE3mXa7A9mDzu69mcLW1+Mc93KAqnBKcv6Q@mail.gmail.com>
	<a0clna976ta70qakqhmon7k8emlid53g0a@4ax.com>
	<a0clna976ta70qakqhmon7k8emlid53g0a-e09XROE/p8c@public.gmane.org>
	<CAPVVMa83k52cy56iCSHBg99S5nhToczGAnRD+w-ic3Lv-oiN7w@mail.gmail.com>
	<vamlnapogq478t9s86vlgak4aeltsqlioj@4ax.com>
Date: Fri, 12 Jun 2015 16:08:05 -0600
Message-ID: 
 <CAPVVMa-XJzT6r_hme3eBDkCR5x-W_+g1Rfx_iSPmbT=pv9oHug@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Allowing another consumer to have a message (ActiveMQ-CPP)
From: Tim Bain <tbain@alumni.duke.edu>
To: ActiveMQ Users <users@activemq.apache.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a113ecb70adfbeb0518595778

--001a113ecb70adfbeb0518595778
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

It sounds like you can reproduce this reliably; can you submit a bug report
in JIRA and attach the client code and broker config that produce the
behavior?  (The simpler the better; do your best to cut out anything that
isn't necessary to show the problem.)

If you want to trace the code yourself and figure out why it's doing what
it's doing, that would be great (and it'll be the fastest way to get
yourself a fix).  If not, you'll wait till someone feels like
investigating, whoever and whenever that might be.
On Jun 12, 2015 7:20 AM, "spamtrap" <nospam.1.friedbadger@spamgourmet.com>
wrote:

> On Fri, 12 Jun 2015 06:56:42 -0600, Tim Bain
> <tbain@alumni.duke.edu> wrote:
>
> I was calling session.start() after calling session.stop().
>
> If I change it to deleting and re-creating a session object the
> message still disappears, but this time when I re-create the consumer
> object (i.e. not when the session starts).
>
> >Does restarting the session mean creating a new session object, or calling
> >start() on the current one after calling stop()?  Is the behavior the same
> >if you do it the other way?
> >On Jun 12, 2015 4:30 AM, "spamtrap" <nospam.1.friedbadger@spamgourmet.com
> >
> >wrote:
> >
> >> On Thu, 11 Jun 2015 14:01:16 -0600, Tim Bain
> >> <tbain@alumni.duke.edu> wrote:
> >>
> >> >Confirm that step by step.  Are the messages still on the broker when
> the
> >> >transaction rolls back?  Are they still on the broker when the client
> >> >disconnects?  Wherever you lose them, the previous step is the one to
> >> >investigate.
> >>
> >> I've now done this.  The message is still there when the transaction
> >> rolls and and the broker disconnects.  It is still there when the
> >> client disconnects.  It is still there when I create a new consumer.
> >> It 'disappears' when I restart the session.  In the broker log I can
> >> see an Acknowledgement at this time, but it wasn't done by me.
> >>
> >>
> >>
>
>
>

--001a113ecb70adfbeb0518595778--