Re: [aerogear-dev] verification of JMS workflow

There is an issue covering that: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/AGPUSH-1420 Should we schedule it for 1.1.1? On Mon, Nov 16, 2015 at 9:40 PM, Matthias Wessendorf <matzew(a)apache.org&gt; wrote: > Lukas, Tomas, > > good input, on the different settings - can you of you send a PR against > our aerogear.org repo, so that we have this documented in our user guide > for configuration? > > On Mon, Nov 16, 2015 at 8:51 PM, Lukas Fryc <lfryc(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote: > >> I've discussed this further with Tomas and he told me he successfully >> tested that our impl does not exceed given (configured) memory limits. >> >> You have to switch the queue settings to: address-full-policy=BLOCK >> (default is PAGE, which can cause exceeding the disk space and perhaps slow >> down the node if there are really lot of recipients. which is, well, not >> ideal) :-). >> The best option would be to use address-full-policy=FAIL. I believe this >> will fail transaction and the queue will try to redeliver, but still have >> to get to confirming that. (This can be configured to exponential back-off >> and try to deliver so many times that it really does its job (such as try >> to redeliver after 5 seconds, but repeat that e.g. up to 2 hours, then fail >> the message finally as non-deliverable)). >> >> On Thu, Nov 5, 2015 at 10:43 AM, Lukas Fryc <lfryc(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote: >> >>> I've updated the related issue to track the idea: >>> https://issues.jboss.org/browse/AGPUSH-1521 >>> >>> On Thu, Nov 5, 2015 at 9:22 AM, Matthias Wessendorf <matzew(a)apache.org&gt; >>> wrote: >>> >>>> awesome, great to hear - >>>> >>>> For the 1.1.x (mainly 1.1.1 first ;-)) let's see if we can provide an >>>> optimized strategy. Lukas was already hinting this on IRC. >>>> >>>> Tomas, thanks for the updates and the testing effort! >>>> >>>> On Thu, Nov 5, 2015 at 8:57 AM, Tomáš Hradec <thradec(a)gmail.com&gt; >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Hi all >>>>> >>>>> I did some testing of JMS workflow used in UPS during sending >>>>> notifications. I can confirm, that suggested blocking strategy, as >>>>> protection against OOM errors, works as expected. However in worst scenario >>>>> could cause blocking 6 of 20 threads (from MDBs pool). So I would suggest >>>>> using different approach, with more optimal resource usage, some options >>>>> were discussed already with Lukas. >>>>> >>>>> Regards >>>>> Tomas >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> aerogear-dev mailing list >>>>> aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org >>>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Matthias Wessendorf >>>> >>>> blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/ >>>> sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf >>>> twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> aerogear-dev mailing list >>>> aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org >>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Lukáš Fryč >>> Software Engineer >>> Red Hat Mobile | AeroGear.org, FeedHenry.org >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> Lukáš Fryč >> Software Engineer >> Red Hat Mobile | AeroGear.org, FeedHenry.org >> >> _______________________________________________ >> aerogear-dev mailing list >> aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org >> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev >> > > > > -- > Matthias Wessendorf > > blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/ > sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf > twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf > > _______________________________________________ > aerogear-dev mailing list > aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev > -- Lukáš Fryč Software Engineer Red Hat Mobile | AeroGear.org, FeedHenry.org _______________________________________________ aerogear-dev mailing list aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev