There could be a bug relating to closes with the failover transport
possibly, but the ActiveMQConnection does wait up to the closeTimeout
for a close to succeed before shutting down - so you could try reduce
the timeout.
http://incubator.apache.org/activemq/maven/activemq-core/apidocs/org/apache/activemq/ActiveMQConnection.html#setCloseTimeout(int)
On 12/12/06, Keith Irwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Folks--
When we have clients running and we take down AMQ (<= 4.1.0), then
attempt to shutdown the clients with Control-C (rather than kill the
JVM with a -9), the clients won't shut down. It's as if a "close" on
the failover connection never reaches the amq client classes.
I note that in the 4.1.0 release notes, this issue is referenced, and
the advice is to set the maxReconnectAttempts (or similar) property to
something non-zero.
The problem is that we don't want there to be a max number of
attempts. Unless we specifically want to take down the client (say,
for an apt-get package upgrade), we want it to keep on trying forever.
SO, my question: Is there an architectural reason for not being able
to close a failover connection if AMQ is down?
If it isn't impossible due to tradeoffs elsewhere in the code base, we
might be willing to submit a patch to fix the issue.
Our only other recourse is to attempt to close the connections in
separate threads, then timeout those threads after a while and fall
out the end of the java process.
For instance:
Thread th = new Thread(new Runnable() {
public void run() {
connection.close();
}
});
th.start();
// give up after 2 seconds
Thread.currentThread().join(2000);
I guess this is do-able, but it seems, you know, some how, well, wrong.
So, is it worth investigating a patch to AMQ?
Keith
--
James
-------
http://radio.weblogs.com/0112098/
