You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@falcon.apache.org by Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb...@nanthrax.net> on 2015/02/10 15:19:54 UTC
[HEADS UP] Support of ActiveMQ HA/Scalability
Hi all,
I'm working on the ActiveMQ update (to 5.10.1) and improvements on the
broker (configuration flexibility, tuning, etc).
I plan also to improve the support of some ActiveMQ features, especially:
1/ master/slave support with kahadb and JDBC locking backend
2/ network of brokers support to be able to have Falcon instances
producing on one broker which can dispatch the messages (including
conduit subscriptions support) to other brokers where Falcon instances
can get the messages.
I will send more details and patches very soon.
Thanks,
Regards
JB
--
Jean-Baptiste Onofré
jbonofre@apache.org
http://blog.nanthrax.net
Talend - http://www.talend.com
Re: [HEADS UP] Support of ActiveMQ HA/Scalability
Posted by Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb...@nanthrax.net>.
OK, it's what I thought: stomp is mostly used for python or perl,
openwire from JMS/NMS/CMS.
Thanks,
Regards
JB
On 02/12/2015 10:58 AM, Idris Ali wrote:
> Platform team here uses stomp from perl to check the ActiveMQ service and
> other monitoring.
>
> Thanks,
> -Idris
>
> On Thu, Feb 12, 2015 at 1:37 AM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb...@nanthrax.net>
> wrote:
>
>> By the way, who are the clients which use stomp (maybe python as it's the
>> only protocol supported by python) ? Openwire should be used as default
>> transport connector, at least for JMS and CMS.
>>
>> Regards
>> JB
>>
>> On 02/11/2015 08:59 PM, Idris Ali wrote:
>>
>>> Yeah sure, no hurry.
>>>
>>> I think I figured it out, seems to be the memory config issue in the new
>>> installation.
>>>
>>> 2015-02-11 17:03:44,843 | ERROR | Could not accept connection :
>>> java.lang.Exception: java.lang.OutOfMemoryError: Java heap space |
>>> org.apache.activemq.broker.TransportConnector | Ac
>>>
>>> tiveMQ Transport Server Thread Handler: stomp://localhost:61613
>>>
>>> 2015-02-11 17:02:32,440 | ERROR | Could not accept connection :
>>> java.lang.Exception: java.lang.OutOfMemoryError: Java heap space |
>>> org.apache.activemq.broker.TransportConnector | Ac
>>>
>>> tiveMQ Transport Server Thread Handler: tcp://0.0.0.0:61616
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> 2015-02-11 17:02:26,140 | DEBUG | Unregistering MBean
>>> org.apache.activemq:type=Broker,brokerName=localhost,
>>> connector=clientConnectors,connectorName=openwire,
>>> connectionViewType=clien
>>>
>>> tId,connectionName=ID_tzns4008.grid.uj1.inmobi.com-
>>> 48815-1422442061155-2_1
>>> | org.apache.activemq.broker.jmx.ManagementContext | ActiveMQ Transport:
>>> tcp:///IP:40234@61616
>>>
>>> 2015-02-11 17:01:45,533 | WARN | Failed to remove producer:
>>> ID:machine-48831-1423672843718-0:1:1:1 |
>>> org.apache.activemq.broker.TransportConnection | ActiveMQ
>>>
>>> Transport: tcp:///IP:55499@61616
>>>
>>> *java.lang.OutOfMemoryError: Java heap space *
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> at
>>> java.util.concurrent.CopyOnWriteArrayList.remove(
>>> CopyOnWriteArrayList.java:515)
>>>
>>>
>>> at
>>> java.util.concurrent.CopyOnWriteArraySet.remove(
>>> CopyOnWriteArraySet.java:232)
>>>
>>> Followed by lot of this messages:
>>>
>>> java.lang.OutOfMemoryError: Java heap space
>>>
>>>
>>> Thanks again,
>>>
>>> -Idris
>>>
>>> On Thu, Feb 12, 2015 at 1:04 AM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb...@nanthrax.net>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hey Idris,
>>>>
>>>> if you don't mind, I would like to work on this tomorrow (my time).
>>>>
>>>> Regards
>>>> JB
>>>>
>>>> On 02/11/2015 07:36 PM, Idris Ali wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hi JB,
>>>>>
>>>>> Slightly off from this discussion, we recently upgraded ActiveMQ version
>>>>> to
>>>>> 5.9.1 from 5.4.3 to work with Falcon.
>>>>>
>>>>> With the default configs, however we see wire format negotiation
>>>>> timedout
>>>>> issue pretty often and the job fails.
>>>>>
>>>>> Failing Oozie Launcher, Main class
>>>>> [org.apache.oozie.action.hadoop.JavaMain], main() threw exception,
>>>>> javax.jms.JMSException: Wire format negotiation timeout: peer did not
>>>>> send his wire format.
>>>>> org.apache.oozie.action.hadoop.JavaMainException:
>>>>> javax.jms.JMSException: Wire format negotiation timeout: peer did not
>>>>> send his wire format.
>>>>> at org.apache.oozie.action.hadoop.JavaMain.run(JavaMain.
>>>>> java:60)
>>>>> at org.apache.oozie.action.hadoop.LauncherMain.run(
>>>>> LauncherMain.java:42)
>>>>> at org.apache.oozie.action.hadoop.JavaMain.main(JavaMain.
>>>>> java:37)
>>>>> at sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke0(Native Method)
>>>>> at sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(
>>>>> NativeMethodAccessorImpl.java:57)
>>>>> at sun.reflect.DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(
>>>>> DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.java:43)
>>>>> at java.lang.reflect.Method.invoke(Method.java:606)
>>>>> at org.apache.oozie.action.hadoop.LauncherMapper.map(
>>>>> LauncherMapper.java:293)
>>>>> at org.apache.hadoop.mapred.MapRunner.run(MapRunner.java:54)
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Initial investigation suggests something to do with Log4j deadlock.
>>>>> Please let me know if this is a known issue in 5.9.1 ?
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>> -Idris
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Wed, Feb 11, 2015 at 9:20 AM, Pallavi Rao <pa...@inmobi.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> JB,
>>>>>
>>>>>> We are working on Falcon talking to ActiveMQ HA setup too. Our initial
>>>>>> hunch is that as long as the right URL (with fail over scheme) is
>>>>>> specified
>>>>>> in the configuration, startup properties or cluster definition, it
>>>>>> should
>>>>>> work without any code changes. Plan to run a quick test soon. Will keep
>>>>>> you
>>>>>> posted.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>> Pallavi
>>>>>> On Feb 10, 2015 7:51 PM, "Jean-Baptiste Onofré" <jb...@nanthrax.net>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I'm working on the ActiveMQ update (to 5.10.1) and improvements on the
>>>>>>> broker (configuration flexibility, tuning, etc).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I plan also to improve the support of some ActiveMQ features,
>>>>>>> especially:
>>>>>>> 1/ master/slave support with kahadb and JDBC locking backend
>>>>>>> 2/ network of brokers support to be able to have Falcon instances
>>>>>>> producing on one broker which can dispatch the messages (including
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> conduit
>>>>>>
>>>>>> subscriptions support) to other brokers where Falcon instances can get
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>
>>>>>> messages.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I will send more details and patches very soon.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>> Regards
>>>>>>> JB
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> Jean-Baptiste Onofré
>>>>>>> jbonofre@apache.org
>>>>>>> http://blog.nanthrax.net
>>>>>>> Talend - http://www.talend.com
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>> _____________________________________________________________
>>>>>> The information contained in this communication is intended solely for
>>>>>> the
>>>>>> use of the individual or entity to whom it is addressed and others
>>>>>> authorized to receive it. It may contain confidential or legally
>>>>>> privileged
>>>>>> information. If you are not the intended recipient you are hereby
>>>>>> notified
>>>>>> that any disclosure, copying, distribution or taking any action in
>>>>>> reliance
>>>>>> on the contents of this information is strictly prohibited and may be
>>>>>> unlawful. If you have received this communication in error, please
>>>>>> notify
>>>>>> us immediately by responding to this email and then delete it from your
>>>>>> system. The firm is neither liable for the proper and complete
>>>>>> transmission
>>>>>> of the information contained in this communication nor for any delay in
>>>>>> its
>>>>>> receipt.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>> Jean-Baptiste Onofré
>>>> jbonofre@apache.org
>>>> http://blog.nanthrax.net
>>>> Talend - http://www.talend.com
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>> --
>> Jean-Baptiste Onofré
>> jbonofre@apache.org
>> http://blog.nanthrax.net
>> Talend - http://www.talend.com
>>
>
--
Jean-Baptiste Onofré
jbonofre@apache.org
http://blog.nanthrax.net
Talend - http://www.talend.com
Re: [HEADS UP] Support of ActiveMQ HA/Scalability
Posted by Idris Ali <ps...@gmail.com>.
Platform team here uses stomp from perl to check the ActiveMQ service and
other monitoring.
Thanks,
-Idris
On Thu, Feb 12, 2015 at 1:37 AM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb...@nanthrax.net>
wrote:
> By the way, who are the clients which use stomp (maybe python as it's the
> only protocol supported by python) ? Openwire should be used as default
> transport connector, at least for JMS and CMS.
>
> Regards
> JB
>
> On 02/11/2015 08:59 PM, Idris Ali wrote:
>
>> Yeah sure, no hurry.
>>
>> I think I figured it out, seems to be the memory config issue in the new
>> installation.
>>
>> 2015-02-11 17:03:44,843 | ERROR | Could not accept connection :
>> java.lang.Exception: java.lang.OutOfMemoryError: Java heap space |
>> org.apache.activemq.broker.TransportConnector | Ac
>>
>> tiveMQ Transport Server Thread Handler: stomp://localhost:61613
>>
>> 2015-02-11 17:02:32,440 | ERROR | Could not accept connection :
>> java.lang.Exception: java.lang.OutOfMemoryError: Java heap space |
>> org.apache.activemq.broker.TransportConnector | Ac
>>
>> tiveMQ Transport Server Thread Handler: tcp://0.0.0.0:61616
>>
>>
>>
>> 2015-02-11 17:02:26,140 | DEBUG | Unregistering MBean
>> org.apache.activemq:type=Broker,brokerName=localhost,
>> connector=clientConnectors,connectorName=openwire,
>> connectionViewType=clien
>>
>> tId,connectionName=ID_tzns4008.grid.uj1.inmobi.com-
>> 48815-1422442061155-2_1
>> | org.apache.activemq.broker.jmx.ManagementContext | ActiveMQ Transport:
>> tcp:///IP:40234@61616
>>
>> 2015-02-11 17:01:45,533 | WARN | Failed to remove producer:
>> ID:machine-48831-1423672843718-0:1:1:1 |
>> org.apache.activemq.broker.TransportConnection | ActiveMQ
>>
>> Transport: tcp:///IP:55499@61616
>>
>> *java.lang.OutOfMemoryError: Java heap space *
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> at
>> java.util.concurrent.CopyOnWriteArrayList.remove(
>> CopyOnWriteArrayList.java:515)
>>
>>
>> at
>> java.util.concurrent.CopyOnWriteArraySet.remove(
>> CopyOnWriteArraySet.java:232)
>>
>> Followed by lot of this messages:
>>
>> java.lang.OutOfMemoryError: Java heap space
>>
>>
>> Thanks again,
>>
>> -Idris
>>
>> On Thu, Feb 12, 2015 at 1:04 AM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb...@nanthrax.net>
>> wrote:
>>
>> Hey Idris,
>>>
>>> if you don't mind, I would like to work on this tomorrow (my time).
>>>
>>> Regards
>>> JB
>>>
>>> On 02/11/2015 07:36 PM, Idris Ali wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi JB,
>>>>
>>>> Slightly off from this discussion, we recently upgraded ActiveMQ version
>>>> to
>>>> 5.9.1 from 5.4.3 to work with Falcon.
>>>>
>>>> With the default configs, however we see wire format negotiation
>>>> timedout
>>>> issue pretty often and the job fails.
>>>>
>>>> Failing Oozie Launcher, Main class
>>>> [org.apache.oozie.action.hadoop.JavaMain], main() threw exception,
>>>> javax.jms.JMSException: Wire format negotiation timeout: peer did not
>>>> send his wire format.
>>>> org.apache.oozie.action.hadoop.JavaMainException:
>>>> javax.jms.JMSException: Wire format negotiation timeout: peer did not
>>>> send his wire format.
>>>> at org.apache.oozie.action.hadoop.JavaMain.run(JavaMain.
>>>> java:60)
>>>> at org.apache.oozie.action.hadoop.LauncherMain.run(
>>>> LauncherMain.java:42)
>>>> at org.apache.oozie.action.hadoop.JavaMain.main(JavaMain.
>>>> java:37)
>>>> at sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke0(Native Method)
>>>> at sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(
>>>> NativeMethodAccessorImpl.java:57)
>>>> at sun.reflect.DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(
>>>> DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.java:43)
>>>> at java.lang.reflect.Method.invoke(Method.java:606)
>>>> at org.apache.oozie.action.hadoop.LauncherMapper.map(
>>>> LauncherMapper.java:293)
>>>> at org.apache.hadoop.mapred.MapRunner.run(MapRunner.java:54)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Initial investigation suggests something to do with Log4j deadlock.
>>>> Please let me know if this is a known issue in 5.9.1 ?
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> -Idris
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, Feb 11, 2015 at 9:20 AM, Pallavi Rao <pa...@inmobi.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> JB,
>>>>
>>>>> We are working on Falcon talking to ActiveMQ HA setup too. Our initial
>>>>> hunch is that as long as the right URL (with fail over scheme) is
>>>>> specified
>>>>> in the configuration, startup properties or cluster definition, it
>>>>> should
>>>>> work without any code changes. Plan to run a quick test soon. Will keep
>>>>> you
>>>>> posted.
>>>>>
>>>>> Regards,
>>>>> Pallavi
>>>>> On Feb 10, 2015 7:51 PM, "Jean-Baptiste Onofré" <jb...@nanthrax.net>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I'm working on the ActiveMQ update (to 5.10.1) and improvements on the
>>>>>> broker (configuration flexibility, tuning, etc).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I plan also to improve the support of some ActiveMQ features,
>>>>>> especially:
>>>>>> 1/ master/slave support with kahadb and JDBC locking backend
>>>>>> 2/ network of brokers support to be able to have Falcon instances
>>>>>> producing on one broker which can dispatch the messages (including
>>>>>>
>>>>>> conduit
>>>>>
>>>>> subscriptions support) to other brokers where Falcon instances can get
>>>>>>
>>>>>> the
>>>>>
>>>>> messages.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I will send more details and patches very soon.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>> Regards
>>>>>> JB
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Jean-Baptiste Onofré
>>>>>> jbonofre@apache.org
>>>>>> http://blog.nanthrax.net
>>>>>> Talend - http://www.talend.com
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>> _____________________________________________________________
>>>>> The information contained in this communication is intended solely for
>>>>> the
>>>>> use of the individual or entity to whom it is addressed and others
>>>>> authorized to receive it. It may contain confidential or legally
>>>>> privileged
>>>>> information. If you are not the intended recipient you are hereby
>>>>> notified
>>>>> that any disclosure, copying, distribution or taking any action in
>>>>> reliance
>>>>> on the contents of this information is strictly prohibited and may be
>>>>> unlawful. If you have received this communication in error, please
>>>>> notify
>>>>> us immediately by responding to this email and then delete it from your
>>>>> system. The firm is neither liable for the proper and complete
>>>>> transmission
>>>>> of the information contained in this communication nor for any delay in
>>>>> its
>>>>> receipt.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> --
>>> Jean-Baptiste Onofré
>>> jbonofre@apache.org
>>> http://blog.nanthrax.net
>>> Talend - http://www.talend.com
>>>
>>>
>>
> --
> Jean-Baptiste Onofré
> jbonofre@apache.org
> http://blog.nanthrax.net
> Talend - http://www.talend.com
>
Re: [HEADS UP] Support of ActiveMQ HA/Scalability
Posted by Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb...@nanthrax.net>.
By the way, who are the clients which use stomp (maybe python as it's
the only protocol supported by python) ? Openwire should be used as
default transport connector, at least for JMS and CMS.
Regards
JB
On 02/11/2015 08:59 PM, Idris Ali wrote:
> Yeah sure, no hurry.
>
> I think I figured it out, seems to be the memory config issue in the new
> installation.
>
> 2015-02-11 17:03:44,843 | ERROR | Could not accept connection :
> java.lang.Exception: java.lang.OutOfMemoryError: Java heap space |
> org.apache.activemq.broker.TransportConnector | Ac
>
> tiveMQ Transport Server Thread Handler: stomp://localhost:61613
>
> 2015-02-11 17:02:32,440 | ERROR | Could not accept connection :
> java.lang.Exception: java.lang.OutOfMemoryError: Java heap space |
> org.apache.activemq.broker.TransportConnector | Ac
>
> tiveMQ Transport Server Thread Handler: tcp://0.0.0.0:61616
>
>
>
> 2015-02-11 17:02:26,140 | DEBUG | Unregistering MBean
> org.apache.activemq:type=Broker,brokerName=localhost,connector=clientConnectors,connectorName=openwire,connectionViewType=clien
>
> tId,connectionName=ID_tzns4008.grid.uj1.inmobi.com-48815-1422442061155-2_1
> | org.apache.activemq.broker.jmx.ManagementContext | ActiveMQ Transport:
> tcp:///IP:40234@61616
>
> 2015-02-11 17:01:45,533 | WARN | Failed to remove producer:
> ID:machine-48831-1423672843718-0:1:1:1 |
> org.apache.activemq.broker.TransportConnection | ActiveMQ
>
> Transport: tcp:///IP:55499@61616
>
> *java.lang.OutOfMemoryError: Java heap space *
>
>
>
> at
> java.util.concurrent.CopyOnWriteArrayList.remove(CopyOnWriteArrayList.java:515)
>
>
> at
> java.util.concurrent.CopyOnWriteArraySet.remove(CopyOnWriteArraySet.java:232)
>
> Followed by lot of this messages:
>
> java.lang.OutOfMemoryError: Java heap space
>
>
> Thanks again,
>
> -Idris
>
> On Thu, Feb 12, 2015 at 1:04 AM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb...@nanthrax.net>
> wrote:
>
>> Hey Idris,
>>
>> if you don't mind, I would like to work on this tomorrow (my time).
>>
>> Regards
>> JB
>>
>> On 02/11/2015 07:36 PM, Idris Ali wrote:
>>
>>> Hi JB,
>>>
>>> Slightly off from this discussion, we recently upgraded ActiveMQ version
>>> to
>>> 5.9.1 from 5.4.3 to work with Falcon.
>>>
>>> With the default configs, however we see wire format negotiation timedout
>>> issue pretty often and the job fails.
>>>
>>> Failing Oozie Launcher, Main class
>>> [org.apache.oozie.action.hadoop.JavaMain], main() threw exception,
>>> javax.jms.JMSException: Wire format negotiation timeout: peer did not
>>> send his wire format.
>>> org.apache.oozie.action.hadoop.JavaMainException:
>>> javax.jms.JMSException: Wire format negotiation timeout: peer did not
>>> send his wire format.
>>> at org.apache.oozie.action.hadoop.JavaMain.run(JavaMain.java:60)
>>> at org.apache.oozie.action.hadoop.LauncherMain.run(
>>> LauncherMain.java:42)
>>> at org.apache.oozie.action.hadoop.JavaMain.main(JavaMain.java:37)
>>> at sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke0(Native Method)
>>> at sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(
>>> NativeMethodAccessorImpl.java:57)
>>> at sun.reflect.DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(
>>> DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.java:43)
>>> at java.lang.reflect.Method.invoke(Method.java:606)
>>> at org.apache.oozie.action.hadoop.LauncherMapper.map(
>>> LauncherMapper.java:293)
>>> at org.apache.hadoop.mapred.MapRunner.run(MapRunner.java:54)
>>>
>>>
>>> Initial investigation suggests something to do with Log4j deadlock.
>>> Please let me know if this is a known issue in 5.9.1 ?
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> -Idris
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, Feb 11, 2015 at 9:20 AM, Pallavi Rao <pa...@inmobi.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> JB,
>>>> We are working on Falcon talking to ActiveMQ HA setup too. Our initial
>>>> hunch is that as long as the right URL (with fail over scheme) is
>>>> specified
>>>> in the configuration, startup properties or cluster definition, it should
>>>> work without any code changes. Plan to run a quick test soon. Will keep
>>>> you
>>>> posted.
>>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>> Pallavi
>>>> On Feb 10, 2015 7:51 PM, "Jean-Baptiste Onofré" <jb...@nanthrax.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hi all,
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm working on the ActiveMQ update (to 5.10.1) and improvements on the
>>>>> broker (configuration flexibility, tuning, etc).
>>>>>
>>>>> I plan also to improve the support of some ActiveMQ features,
>>>>> especially:
>>>>> 1/ master/slave support with kahadb and JDBC locking backend
>>>>> 2/ network of brokers support to be able to have Falcon instances
>>>>> producing on one broker which can dispatch the messages (including
>>>>>
>>>> conduit
>>>>
>>>>> subscriptions support) to other brokers where Falcon instances can get
>>>>>
>>>> the
>>>>
>>>>> messages.
>>>>>
>>>>> I will send more details and patches very soon.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>> Regards
>>>>> JB
>>>>> --
>>>>> Jean-Baptiste Onofré
>>>>> jbonofre@apache.org
>>>>> http://blog.nanthrax.net
>>>>> Talend - http://www.talend.com
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> _____________________________________________________________
>>>> The information contained in this communication is intended solely for
>>>> the
>>>> use of the individual or entity to whom it is addressed and others
>>>> authorized to receive it. It may contain confidential or legally
>>>> privileged
>>>> information. If you are not the intended recipient you are hereby
>>>> notified
>>>> that any disclosure, copying, distribution or taking any action in
>>>> reliance
>>>> on the contents of this information is strictly prohibited and may be
>>>> unlawful. If you have received this communication in error, please notify
>>>> us immediately by responding to this email and then delete it from your
>>>> system. The firm is neither liable for the proper and complete
>>>> transmission
>>>> of the information contained in this communication nor for any delay in
>>>> its
>>>> receipt.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>> --
>> Jean-Baptiste Onofré
>> jbonofre@apache.org
>> http://blog.nanthrax.net
>> Talend - http://www.talend.com
>>
>
--
Jean-Baptiste Onofré
jbonofre@apache.org
http://blog.nanthrax.net
Talend - http://www.talend.com
Re: [HEADS UP] Support of ActiveMQ HA/Scalability
Posted by Idris Ali <ps...@gmail.com>.
Yeah sure, no hurry.
I think I figured it out, seems to be the memory config issue in the new
installation.
2015-02-11 17:03:44,843 | ERROR | Could not accept connection :
java.lang.Exception: java.lang.OutOfMemoryError: Java heap space |
org.apache.activemq.broker.TransportConnector | Ac
tiveMQ Transport Server Thread Handler: stomp://localhost:61613
2015-02-11 17:02:32,440 | ERROR | Could not accept connection :
java.lang.Exception: java.lang.OutOfMemoryError: Java heap space |
org.apache.activemq.broker.TransportConnector | Ac
tiveMQ Transport Server Thread Handler: tcp://0.0.0.0:61616
2015-02-11 17:02:26,140 | DEBUG | Unregistering MBean
org.apache.activemq:type=Broker,brokerName=localhost,connector=clientConnectors,connectorName=openwire,connectionViewType=clien
tId,connectionName=ID_tzns4008.grid.uj1.inmobi.com-48815-1422442061155-2_1
| org.apache.activemq.broker.jmx.ManagementContext | ActiveMQ Transport:
tcp:///IP:40234@61616
2015-02-11 17:01:45,533 | WARN | Failed to remove producer:
ID:machine-48831-1423672843718-0:1:1:1 |
org.apache.activemq.broker.TransportConnection | ActiveMQ
Transport: tcp:///IP:55499@61616
*java.lang.OutOfMemoryError: Java heap space *
at
java.util.concurrent.CopyOnWriteArrayList.remove(CopyOnWriteArrayList.java:515)
at
java.util.concurrent.CopyOnWriteArraySet.remove(CopyOnWriteArraySet.java:232)
Followed by lot of this messages:
java.lang.OutOfMemoryError: Java heap space
Thanks again,
-Idris
On Thu, Feb 12, 2015 at 1:04 AM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb...@nanthrax.net>
wrote:
> Hey Idris,
>
> if you don't mind, I would like to work on this tomorrow (my time).
>
> Regards
> JB
>
> On 02/11/2015 07:36 PM, Idris Ali wrote:
>
>> Hi JB,
>>
>> Slightly off from this discussion, we recently upgraded ActiveMQ version
>> to
>> 5.9.1 from 5.4.3 to work with Falcon.
>>
>> With the default configs, however we see wire format negotiation timedout
>> issue pretty often and the job fails.
>>
>> Failing Oozie Launcher, Main class
>> [org.apache.oozie.action.hadoop.JavaMain], main() threw exception,
>> javax.jms.JMSException: Wire format negotiation timeout: peer did not
>> send his wire format.
>> org.apache.oozie.action.hadoop.JavaMainException:
>> javax.jms.JMSException: Wire format negotiation timeout: peer did not
>> send his wire format.
>> at org.apache.oozie.action.hadoop.JavaMain.run(JavaMain.java:60)
>> at org.apache.oozie.action.hadoop.LauncherMain.run(
>> LauncherMain.java:42)
>> at org.apache.oozie.action.hadoop.JavaMain.main(JavaMain.java:37)
>> at sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke0(Native Method)
>> at sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(
>> NativeMethodAccessorImpl.java:57)
>> at sun.reflect.DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(
>> DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.java:43)
>> at java.lang.reflect.Method.invoke(Method.java:606)
>> at org.apache.oozie.action.hadoop.LauncherMapper.map(
>> LauncherMapper.java:293)
>> at org.apache.hadoop.mapred.MapRunner.run(MapRunner.java:54)
>>
>>
>> Initial investigation suggests something to do with Log4j deadlock.
>> Please let me know if this is a known issue in 5.9.1 ?
>>
>> Thanks,
>> -Idris
>>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Feb 11, 2015 at 9:20 AM, Pallavi Rao <pa...@inmobi.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> JB,
>>> We are working on Falcon talking to ActiveMQ HA setup too. Our initial
>>> hunch is that as long as the right URL (with fail over scheme) is
>>> specified
>>> in the configuration, startup properties or cluster definition, it should
>>> work without any code changes. Plan to run a quick test soon. Will keep
>>> you
>>> posted.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Pallavi
>>> On Feb 10, 2015 7:51 PM, "Jean-Baptiste Onofré" <jb...@nanthrax.net> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi all,
>>>>
>>>> I'm working on the ActiveMQ update (to 5.10.1) and improvements on the
>>>> broker (configuration flexibility, tuning, etc).
>>>>
>>>> I plan also to improve the support of some ActiveMQ features,
>>>> especially:
>>>> 1/ master/slave support with kahadb and JDBC locking backend
>>>> 2/ network of brokers support to be able to have Falcon instances
>>>> producing on one broker which can dispatch the messages (including
>>>>
>>> conduit
>>>
>>>> subscriptions support) to other brokers where Falcon instances can get
>>>>
>>> the
>>>
>>>> messages.
>>>>
>>>> I will send more details and patches very soon.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Regards
>>>> JB
>>>> --
>>>> Jean-Baptiste Onofré
>>>> jbonofre@apache.org
>>>> http://blog.nanthrax.net
>>>> Talend - http://www.talend.com
>>>>
>>>>
>>> --
>>> _____________________________________________________________
>>> The information contained in this communication is intended solely for
>>> the
>>> use of the individual or entity to whom it is addressed and others
>>> authorized to receive it. It may contain confidential or legally
>>> privileged
>>> information. If you are not the intended recipient you are hereby
>>> notified
>>> that any disclosure, copying, distribution or taking any action in
>>> reliance
>>> on the contents of this information is strictly prohibited and may be
>>> unlawful. If you have received this communication in error, please notify
>>> us immediately by responding to this email and then delete it from your
>>> system. The firm is neither liable for the proper and complete
>>> transmission
>>> of the information contained in this communication nor for any delay in
>>> its
>>> receipt.
>>>
>>>
>>
> --
> Jean-Baptiste Onofré
> jbonofre@apache.org
> http://blog.nanthrax.net
> Talend - http://www.talend.com
>
Re: [HEADS UP] Support of ActiveMQ HA/Scalability
Posted by Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb...@nanthrax.net>.
Hey Idris,
if you don't mind, I would like to work on this tomorrow (my time).
Regards
JB
On 02/11/2015 07:36 PM, Idris Ali wrote:
> Hi JB,
>
> Slightly off from this discussion, we recently upgraded ActiveMQ version to
> 5.9.1 from 5.4.3 to work with Falcon.
>
> With the default configs, however we see wire format negotiation timedout
> issue pretty often and the job fails.
>
> Failing Oozie Launcher, Main class
> [org.apache.oozie.action.hadoop.JavaMain], main() threw exception,
> javax.jms.JMSException: Wire format negotiation timeout: peer did not
> send his wire format.
> org.apache.oozie.action.hadoop.JavaMainException:
> javax.jms.JMSException: Wire format negotiation timeout: peer did not
> send his wire format.
> at org.apache.oozie.action.hadoop.JavaMain.run(JavaMain.java:60)
> at org.apache.oozie.action.hadoop.LauncherMain.run(LauncherMain.java:42)
> at org.apache.oozie.action.hadoop.JavaMain.main(JavaMain.java:37)
> at sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke0(Native Method)
> at sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(NativeMethodAccessorImpl.java:57)
> at sun.reflect.DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.java:43)
> at java.lang.reflect.Method.invoke(Method.java:606)
> at org.apache.oozie.action.hadoop.LauncherMapper.map(LauncherMapper.java:293)
> at org.apache.hadoop.mapred.MapRunner.run(MapRunner.java:54)
>
>
> Initial investigation suggests something to do with Log4j deadlock.
> Please let me know if this is a known issue in 5.9.1 ?
>
> Thanks,
> -Idris
>
>
>
> On Wed, Feb 11, 2015 at 9:20 AM, Pallavi Rao <pa...@inmobi.com> wrote:
>
>> JB,
>> We are working on Falcon talking to ActiveMQ HA setup too. Our initial
>> hunch is that as long as the right URL (with fail over scheme) is specified
>> in the configuration, startup properties or cluster definition, it should
>> work without any code changes. Plan to run a quick test soon. Will keep you
>> posted.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Pallavi
>> On Feb 10, 2015 7:51 PM, "Jean-Baptiste Onofré" <jb...@nanthrax.net> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> I'm working on the ActiveMQ update (to 5.10.1) and improvements on the
>>> broker (configuration flexibility, tuning, etc).
>>>
>>> I plan also to improve the support of some ActiveMQ features, especially:
>>> 1/ master/slave support with kahadb and JDBC locking backend
>>> 2/ network of brokers support to be able to have Falcon instances
>>> producing on one broker which can dispatch the messages (including
>> conduit
>>> subscriptions support) to other brokers where Falcon instances can get
>> the
>>> messages.
>>>
>>> I will send more details and patches very soon.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Regards
>>> JB
>>> --
>>> Jean-Baptiste Onofré
>>> jbonofre@apache.org
>>> http://blog.nanthrax.net
>>> Talend - http://www.talend.com
>>>
>>
>> --
>> _____________________________________________________________
>> The information contained in this communication is intended solely for the
>> use of the individual or entity to whom it is addressed and others
>> authorized to receive it. It may contain confidential or legally privileged
>> information. If you are not the intended recipient you are hereby notified
>> that any disclosure, copying, distribution or taking any action in reliance
>> on the contents of this information is strictly prohibited and may be
>> unlawful. If you have received this communication in error, please notify
>> us immediately by responding to this email and then delete it from your
>> system. The firm is neither liable for the proper and complete transmission
>> of the information contained in this communication nor for any delay in its
>> receipt.
>>
>
--
Jean-Baptiste Onofré
jbonofre@apache.org
http://blog.nanthrax.net
Talend - http://www.talend.com
Re: [HEADS UP] Support of ActiveMQ HA/Scalability
Posted by Idris Ali <ps...@gmail.com>.
Thanks for the quick reply. We will try to configure this property to 30
sec.
However form old Jira, it could be because of Memory issue.
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AMQ-2730
I will keep you updated.
-Idris
On Thu, Feb 12, 2015 at 12:12 AM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb...@nanthrax.net>
wrote:
> Hi Idris,
>
> this JMSException comes from the wireFormat.maxInactivityDurationInitalDelay
> which is too low by default (10 seconds) on the transportConnector.
>
> It's not necessary a deadlock due to the log4j JMSAppender.
>
> I will update the configuration to increase to 30 seconds on the
> transportConnector.
>
> A while ago, I submitted patches about the ActiveMQ update and a more
> flexible way to configure the embedded broker.
>
> I've resumed this work.
>
> Regards
> JB
>
>
> On 02/11/2015 07:36 PM, Idris Ali wrote:
>
>> Hi JB,
>>
>> Slightly off from this discussion, we recently upgraded ActiveMQ version
>> to
>> 5.9.1 from 5.4.3 to work with Falcon.
>>
>> With the default configs, however we see wire format negotiation timedout
>> issue pretty often and the job fails.
>>
>> Failing Oozie Launcher, Main class
>> [org.apache.oozie.action.hadoop.JavaMain], main() threw exception,
>> javax.jms.JMSException: Wire format negotiation timeout: peer did not
>> send his wire format.
>> org.apache.oozie.action.hadoop.JavaMainException:
>> javax.jms.JMSException: Wire format negotiation timeout: peer did not
>> send his wire format.
>> at org.apache.oozie.action.hadoop.JavaMain.run(JavaMain.java:60)
>> at org.apache.oozie.action.hadoop.LauncherMain.run(
>> LauncherMain.java:42)
>> at org.apache.oozie.action.hadoop.JavaMain.main(JavaMain.java:37)
>> at sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke0(Native Method)
>> at sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(
>> NativeMethodAccessorImpl.java:57)
>> at sun.reflect.DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(
>> DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.java:43)
>> at java.lang.reflect.Method.invoke(Method.java:606)
>> at org.apache.oozie.action.hadoop.LauncherMapper.map(
>> LauncherMapper.java:293)
>> at org.apache.hadoop.mapred.MapRunner.run(MapRunner.java:54)
>>
>>
>> Initial investigation suggests something to do with Log4j deadlock.
>> Please let me know if this is a known issue in 5.9.1 ?
>>
>> Thanks,
>> -Idris
>>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Feb 11, 2015 at 9:20 AM, Pallavi Rao <pa...@inmobi.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> JB,
>>> We are working on Falcon talking to ActiveMQ HA setup too. Our initial
>>> hunch is that as long as the right URL (with fail over scheme) is
>>> specified
>>> in the configuration, startup properties or cluster definition, it should
>>> work without any code changes. Plan to run a quick test soon. Will keep
>>> you
>>> posted.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Pallavi
>>> On Feb 10, 2015 7:51 PM, "Jean-Baptiste Onofré" <jb...@nanthrax.net> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi all,
>>>>
>>>> I'm working on the ActiveMQ update (to 5.10.1) and improvements on the
>>>> broker (configuration flexibility, tuning, etc).
>>>>
>>>> I plan also to improve the support of some ActiveMQ features,
>>>> especially:
>>>> 1/ master/slave support with kahadb and JDBC locking backend
>>>> 2/ network of brokers support to be able to have Falcon instances
>>>> producing on one broker which can dispatch the messages (including
>>>>
>>> conduit
>>>
>>>> subscriptions support) to other brokers where Falcon instances can get
>>>>
>>> the
>>>
>>>> messages.
>>>>
>>>> I will send more details and patches very soon.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Regards
>>>> JB
>>>> --
>>>> Jean-Baptiste Onofré
>>>> jbonofre@apache.org
>>>> http://blog.nanthrax.net
>>>> Talend - http://www.talend.com
>>>>
>>>>
>>> --
>>> _____________________________________________________________
>>> The information contained in this communication is intended solely for
>>> the
>>> use of the individual or entity to whom it is addressed and others
>>> authorized to receive it. It may contain confidential or legally
>>> privileged
>>> information. If you are not the intended recipient you are hereby
>>> notified
>>> that any disclosure, copying, distribution or taking any action in
>>> reliance
>>> on the contents of this information is strictly prohibited and may be
>>> unlawful. If you have received this communication in error, please notify
>>> us immediately by responding to this email and then delete it from your
>>> system. The firm is neither liable for the proper and complete
>>> transmission
>>> of the information contained in this communication nor for any delay in
>>> its
>>> receipt.
>>>
>>>
>>
> --
> Jean-Baptiste Onofré
> jbonofre@apache.org
> http://blog.nanthrax.net
> Talend - http://www.talend.com
>
Re: [HEADS UP] Support of ActiveMQ HA/Scalability
Posted by Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb...@nanthrax.net>.
Hi Idris,
this JMSException comes from the
wireFormat.maxInactivityDurationInitalDelay which is too low by default
(10 seconds) on the transportConnector.
It's not necessary a deadlock due to the log4j JMSAppender.
I will update the configuration to increase to 30 seconds on the
transportConnector.
A while ago, I submitted patches about the ActiveMQ update and a more
flexible way to configure the embedded broker.
I've resumed this work.
Regards
JB
On 02/11/2015 07:36 PM, Idris Ali wrote:
> Hi JB,
>
> Slightly off from this discussion, we recently upgraded ActiveMQ version to
> 5.9.1 from 5.4.3 to work with Falcon.
>
> With the default configs, however we see wire format negotiation timedout
> issue pretty often and the job fails.
>
> Failing Oozie Launcher, Main class
> [org.apache.oozie.action.hadoop.JavaMain], main() threw exception,
> javax.jms.JMSException: Wire format negotiation timeout: peer did not
> send his wire format.
> org.apache.oozie.action.hadoop.JavaMainException:
> javax.jms.JMSException: Wire format negotiation timeout: peer did not
> send his wire format.
> at org.apache.oozie.action.hadoop.JavaMain.run(JavaMain.java:60)
> at org.apache.oozie.action.hadoop.LauncherMain.run(LauncherMain.java:42)
> at org.apache.oozie.action.hadoop.JavaMain.main(JavaMain.java:37)
> at sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke0(Native Method)
> at sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(NativeMethodAccessorImpl.java:57)
> at sun.reflect.DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.java:43)
> at java.lang.reflect.Method.invoke(Method.java:606)
> at org.apache.oozie.action.hadoop.LauncherMapper.map(LauncherMapper.java:293)
> at org.apache.hadoop.mapred.MapRunner.run(MapRunner.java:54)
>
>
> Initial investigation suggests something to do with Log4j deadlock.
> Please let me know if this is a known issue in 5.9.1 ?
>
> Thanks,
> -Idris
>
>
>
> On Wed, Feb 11, 2015 at 9:20 AM, Pallavi Rao <pa...@inmobi.com> wrote:
>
>> JB,
>> We are working on Falcon talking to ActiveMQ HA setup too. Our initial
>> hunch is that as long as the right URL (with fail over scheme) is specified
>> in the configuration, startup properties or cluster definition, it should
>> work without any code changes. Plan to run a quick test soon. Will keep you
>> posted.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Pallavi
>> On Feb 10, 2015 7:51 PM, "Jean-Baptiste Onofré" <jb...@nanthrax.net> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> I'm working on the ActiveMQ update (to 5.10.1) and improvements on the
>>> broker (configuration flexibility, tuning, etc).
>>>
>>> I plan also to improve the support of some ActiveMQ features, especially:
>>> 1/ master/slave support with kahadb and JDBC locking backend
>>> 2/ network of brokers support to be able to have Falcon instances
>>> producing on one broker which can dispatch the messages (including
>> conduit
>>> subscriptions support) to other brokers where Falcon instances can get
>> the
>>> messages.
>>>
>>> I will send more details and patches very soon.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Regards
>>> JB
>>> --
>>> Jean-Baptiste Onofré
>>> jbonofre@apache.org
>>> http://blog.nanthrax.net
>>> Talend - http://www.talend.com
>>>
>>
>> --
>> _____________________________________________________________
>> The information contained in this communication is intended solely for the
>> use of the individual or entity to whom it is addressed and others
>> authorized to receive it. It may contain confidential or legally privileged
>> information. If you are not the intended recipient you are hereby notified
>> that any disclosure, copying, distribution or taking any action in reliance
>> on the contents of this information is strictly prohibited and may be
>> unlawful. If you have received this communication in error, please notify
>> us immediately by responding to this email and then delete it from your
>> system. The firm is neither liable for the proper and complete transmission
>> of the information contained in this communication nor for any delay in its
>> receipt.
>>
>
--
Jean-Baptiste Onofré
jbonofre@apache.org
http://blog.nanthrax.net
Talend - http://www.talend.com
Re: [HEADS UP] Support of ActiveMQ HA/Scalability
Posted by Idris Ali <ps...@gmail.com>.
Hi JB,
Slightly off from this discussion, we recently upgraded ActiveMQ version to
5.9.1 from 5.4.3 to work with Falcon.
With the default configs, however we see wire format negotiation timedout
issue pretty often and the job fails.
Failing Oozie Launcher, Main class
[org.apache.oozie.action.hadoop.JavaMain], main() threw exception,
javax.jms.JMSException: Wire format negotiation timeout: peer did not
send his wire format.
org.apache.oozie.action.hadoop.JavaMainException:
javax.jms.JMSException: Wire format negotiation timeout: peer did not
send his wire format.
at org.apache.oozie.action.hadoop.JavaMain.run(JavaMain.java:60)
at org.apache.oozie.action.hadoop.LauncherMain.run(LauncherMain.java:42)
at org.apache.oozie.action.hadoop.JavaMain.main(JavaMain.java:37)
at sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke0(Native Method)
at sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(NativeMethodAccessorImpl.java:57)
at sun.reflect.DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.java:43)
at java.lang.reflect.Method.invoke(Method.java:606)
at org.apache.oozie.action.hadoop.LauncherMapper.map(LauncherMapper.java:293)
at org.apache.hadoop.mapred.MapRunner.run(MapRunner.java:54)
Initial investigation suggests something to do with Log4j deadlock.
Please let me know if this is a known issue in 5.9.1 ?
Thanks,
-Idris
On Wed, Feb 11, 2015 at 9:20 AM, Pallavi Rao <pa...@inmobi.com> wrote:
> JB,
> We are working on Falcon talking to ActiveMQ HA setup too. Our initial
> hunch is that as long as the right URL (with fail over scheme) is specified
> in the configuration, startup properties or cluster definition, it should
> work without any code changes. Plan to run a quick test soon. Will keep you
> posted.
>
> Regards,
> Pallavi
> On Feb 10, 2015 7:51 PM, "Jean-Baptiste Onofré" <jb...@nanthrax.net> wrote:
>
> > Hi all,
> >
> > I'm working on the ActiveMQ update (to 5.10.1) and improvements on the
> > broker (configuration flexibility, tuning, etc).
> >
> > I plan also to improve the support of some ActiveMQ features, especially:
> > 1/ master/slave support with kahadb and JDBC locking backend
> > 2/ network of brokers support to be able to have Falcon instances
> > producing on one broker which can dispatch the messages (including
> conduit
> > subscriptions support) to other brokers where Falcon instances can get
> the
> > messages.
> >
> > I will send more details and patches very soon.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Regards
> > JB
> > --
> > Jean-Baptiste Onofré
> > jbonofre@apache.org
> > http://blog.nanthrax.net
> > Talend - http://www.talend.com
> >
>
> --
> _____________________________________________________________
> The information contained in this communication is intended solely for the
> use of the individual or entity to whom it is addressed and others
> authorized to receive it. It may contain confidential or legally privileged
> information. If you are not the intended recipient you are hereby notified
> that any disclosure, copying, distribution or taking any action in reliance
> on the contents of this information is strictly prohibited and may be
> unlawful. If you have received this communication in error, please notify
> us immediately by responding to this email and then delete it from your
> system. The firm is neither liable for the proper and complete transmission
> of the information contained in this communication nor for any delay in its
> receipt.
>
Re: [HEADS UP] Support of ActiveMQ HA/Scalability
Posted by Pallavi Rao <pa...@inmobi.com>.
JB,
We are working on Falcon talking to ActiveMQ HA setup too. Our initial
hunch is that as long as the right URL (with fail over scheme) is specified
in the configuration, startup properties or cluster definition, it should
work without any code changes. Plan to run a quick test soon. Will keep you
posted.
Regards,
Pallavi
On Feb 10, 2015 7:51 PM, "Jean-Baptiste Onofré" <jb...@nanthrax.net> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I'm working on the ActiveMQ update (to 5.10.1) and improvements on the
> broker (configuration flexibility, tuning, etc).
>
> I plan also to improve the support of some ActiveMQ features, especially:
> 1/ master/slave support with kahadb and JDBC locking backend
> 2/ network of brokers support to be able to have Falcon instances
> producing on one broker which can dispatch the messages (including conduit
> subscriptions support) to other brokers where Falcon instances can get the
> messages.
>
> I will send more details and patches very soon.
>
> Thanks,
> Regards
> JB
> --
> Jean-Baptiste Onofré
> jbonofre@apache.org
> http://blog.nanthrax.net
> Talend - http://www.talend.com
>
--
_____________________________________________________________
The information contained in this communication is intended solely for the
use of the individual or entity to whom it is addressed and others
authorized to receive it. It may contain confidential or legally privileged
information. If you are not the intended recipient you are hereby notified
that any disclosure, copying, distribution or taking any action in reliance
on the contents of this information is strictly prohibited and may be
unlawful. If you have received this communication in error, please notify
us immediately by responding to this email and then delete it from your
system. The firm is neither liable for the proper and complete transmission
of the information contained in this communication nor for any delay in its
receipt.