Messages does not removed after consumption for jms.Topic configured as Core Queue.

[cassidy]

Hello,

My system configuration:

JBoss EAP 6.0.1.GA, AS 7.1.3 final, hornetq-2.2.23.Final-redhat-1

I have Core Queue configured for jms.Topic. Messages consumed successfully(onMessage method is called on MDB) for some time, but it seems that they are never removed from topic.

As result memory consumption for adress going up to value which defined in <max-size-bytes> and then adress is blocked due to <address-full-policy>BLOCK</address-full-policy>. I've tried to configure jms.Topic without  Core Queue configuration - it works fine. Also I've configured jms.Queue as Core Queue explicitly - it also works fine. I know that I can configure different adress policy, but it will not affect root cause of the problem. Another remark: problem is simplified use case of Core Bridge usage: it's reproducible, if bridge goes offline. But with online bridge Core Queue configured for jms.Topic works correctly, Could you please give some advice regarding this problem, maybe I am missing some configuration?

Configuration:

Core queue and jms destinations:

<core-queues>

     <queue name="jms.topic.TestLockDestination">

          <address>jms.topic.TestLockDestination</address>

          <durable>false</durable>

     </queue>

</core-queues>

<jms-destinations>

      <jms-topic name="TestLockDestination">

          <entry name="java:/jms/topic/TestLockDestination"/>

     </jms-topic>

</jms-destinations>

Connection factory:

<pooled-connection-factory name="hornetq-ra-testlock">

         <transaction mode="local"/>

                  <connectors>

                             <connector-ref connector-name="in-vm"/>

                   </connectors>

                   <entries>

                             <entry name="java:/TestLockConnectionFactory"/>

                   </entries>

                   <consumer-window-size>0</consumer-window-size>

                   <pre-acknowledge>true</pre-acknowledge>

</pooled-connection-factory>

Adress:

<address-setting match="jms.queue.TestLockDestination">

                            <expiry-address>jms.queue.ExpiryQueue</expiry-address>

                            <redelivery-delay>0</redelivery-delay>

                            <max-size-bytes>10485760</max-size-bytes>

                            <address-full-policy>BLOCK</address-full-policy>

                            <message-counter-history-day-limit>10</message-counter-history-day-limit>

</address-setting>

[ataylor]

its because you have 2 queues, the core queue that you create yourself and the subscription queue that is created by the consumer, you are only consuming from the latter

[cassidy]

Thanks for an answer. Could you please explain it more deeply? It seems that I do not understand this whole dependency between abstract core api and jms as particular implementation.

1. Am I correct, that Core Queue it a general abstraction, which will be used for JMS use case as well. E.g. internally HornetQ always will work with Core Queues, no matter I am using Core API or JMS API?

2. HornetQ guide says(http://docs.jboss.org/hornetq/2.2.14.Final/user-manual/en/html/jms-core-mapping.html):

"By convention, all JMS queues map to core queues where the core queue name has the string jms.queue. prepended to it. E.g. the JMS queue with the name "orders.europe" would map to the core queue with the name "jms.queue.orders.europe". The address at which the core queue is bound is also given by the core queue name. For JMS topics the address at which the queues that represent the subscriptions are bound is given by prepending the string "jms.topic." to the name of the JMS topic. E.g. the JMS topic with name "news.europe" would map to the core address "jms.topic.news.europe"".

It seems that my mapping is correct, regarding this explanation. If I define Core Queue with mapping to JMS Topic will it be the completely another Core Queue or the underlying Core Queue which is used for this jms.topic by HornetQ?

3. HornetQ guide says(http://docs.jboss.org/hornetq/2.2.14.Final/user-manual/en/html/core-bridges.html): "If you're using JMS then normally the JMS configuration hornetq-jms.xml is loaded after the core configuration file hornetq-configuration.xml is loaded. If your bridge is consuming from a JMS queue then you'll need to make sure the JMS queue is also deployed as a core queue in the core configuration."

How this should be achieved in case if I want to setup Core Bridge between two jms.Topics? I was not able to start a bridge if I use jms.topic directly(probably due to initialization order).

4. In case if i created two queues instead of one, why it is working if I have Core Bridge and it's online?

[ataylor]

1. Am I correct, that Core Queue it a general abstraction, which will be used for JMS use case as well. E.g. internally HornetQ always will work with Core Queues, no matter I am using Core API or JMS API?

correct, The JMS implementation is a facade on top of the core API.

It seems that my mapping is correct, regarding this explanation. If I define Core Queue with mapping to JMS Topic will it be the completely another Core Queue or the underlying Core Queue which is used for this jms.topic by HornetQ?

when you create a core queue you bind it to an address, the address in this case is the topic name. any messages sent to this address wil be sent to any queue that is bound to this address.

How this should be achieved in case if I want to setup Core Bridge between two jms.Topics? I was not able to start a bridge if I use jms.topic directly(probably due to initialization order).

core bridges work between a queue and an address, messages received on a local queue are forwarded to an address on another server.

. In case if i created two queues instead of one, why it is working if I have Core Bridge and it's online?

Im not really sure what you are asking here

[cassidy]

Thank you very much for explanations. Let me summarize:

I actually created jms.topic and Core Queue mapped for an one address: jms.topic.TestLockDestination. E.g. to avoid address blocking on memory consumption I need to consume both from jms.Topic and from Core Queue binded to this address. Core bridge considired as consumer for a local queue, therefore address is not blocking, if bridge online. So I have a problem, if I want to use Core Bridge between two jms.topic. I could not use jms.topic as it is(it is not available on moment of bridge deploy) and need to define a Core Queue to deploy a bridge. But if I use a Core Queue and bridge goes offline, address will be blocked on memory consumption after some time(because nobody consuming from Core Queue). Do you have any idea, how I could resolve such setup? It is not a problem for me to lose messages for remote topic(if bridge goes offline), but if message processing stopped for a local topic due to address blocking it is really a problem.

Currently I see following options:

1. Reimplement client logic and discard Core Bridge usage(e.g. implement simple bridge functionality by myself).

2. Use Core API instead of JMS API(Can I somehow use Core Queue in JMS functionality?).

3. Look at JMS bridges(actually I don't investigate this functionality at all),

[ataylor]

I dont really understand what you are saying tbh, could you try to be a bit more concise.