Re: Fixing following issue:- WARN | Transport Connection to: blockingQueue_1942843618 failed: org.apache.activemq.transport.InactivityIOException: Channel was inactive for too (>30000) long

[Tim Bain <tb...@alumni.duke.edu>]

Sorry for the very long delay in responding; you may very well have figured
this out since then, but in case not...

As I understand it, the keep-alive is only used if maxInactivityInterval is
non-zero, so I don't think that combination of settings does what you were
thinking it would.  I stand by my earlier recommendation that you're better
off getting these messages in your logs occasionally (and knowing you can
generally ignore them) than turning off inactivity checking entirely...

On Dec 18, 2014 9:30 PM, "Sid" <hi...@gmail.com> wrote:

> First of all thanks for responding to this thread.
>
> Right, I did go through following post:-
>
> http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/when-should-you-set-maxInactivityDuration-0-td4688281.html
>
> But was wondering whether the setting of flag "keepAlive=true" helps in
> this
> case, where wireFormat.maxInactivityDuration=0.
>
> I have failover broker url being configured on producer/consumer(broker
> clients), hence say I get " WARN | Transport Connection to:
> blockingQueue_1942843618 failed:
> org.apache.activemq.transport.InactivityIOException: Channel was inactive
> for too (>30000) long" error on broker then what steps I need to take,
> because earlier I experienced that after facing above issue, the
> connectivity is lost among producer, consumer and broker.
>
> So what's recommended next step.
>
> Thanks,
> Sid
>
>
>
> --
> View this message in context:
> http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/Version5-10-0-Fixing-following-issue-WARN-Transport-Connection-to-blockingQueue-1942843618-failed-org-tp4689070p4689112.html
> Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>