beam-commits mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jean-Baptiste Onofré (JIRA) <j...@apache.org>
Subject [jira] [Updated] (BEAM-569) JMS IO should set maxNumRecords to Long.MAX_VALUE by default
Date Sat, 27 Aug 2016 11:57:20 GMT

     [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-569?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]

Jean-Baptiste Onofré updated BEAM-569:
--------------------------------------
    Summary: JMS IO should set maxNumRecords to Long.MAX_VALUE by default  (was: JMS IO should
be able to wait for messages (timeout))

> JMS IO should set maxNumRecords to Long.MAX_VALUE by default
> ------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: BEAM-569
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-569
>             Project: Beam
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>          Components: sdk-java-extensions
>            Reporter: Jean-Baptiste Onofré
>            Assignee: Jean-Baptiste Onofré
>             Fix For: 0.3.0-incubating
>
>
> Right now, the JMS IO source doesn't wait for new message on the JMS destination (it
uses {{receiveNoWait()}} method on the consumer).
> I think, it's worth to give the possibility for the user to define the behavior.
> I propose to introduce {{withTimeout()}} configuration on JMS IO:
> - if the user defines {{-1}}, it means infinite timeout, so the reader will use {{consumer.receive()}}
and the source will wait for new messages on the destination
> - if the user defines {{0}}, it means the current behavior (and default): the reader
will use {{consumer.receiveNoWait()}}.
> - if the user defines any positive value, it's actually the timeout to wait for new messages:
the reader will use {{consumer.receive(timeout)}}.



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)

Mime
View raw message