[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [xmlblaster-devel] Involved XMLBlaster questions
Kelley Phillips wrote:
Setting the JVM Xms and Xmx parameters helped, but my
memory footprint definitely seemed to be growing. I noticed
in an earlier (but fairly recent) post on the mailing list
>>2. How stable is any "current release". The memory footprint of the
>>I downloaded three weeks ago certainly grew over time. This is
>>part due to xmlblaster still being actively developed.
>The release 0.80 is broken for 'volatile' messages.
>All the rest is considered stable, and i don't believe we have a memory
Although Marcel stated the release 0.80 is broken....
isn't the current release 0.80?
That's right, currently as Marcel stated is correct. The release is
stable with the exception of the "Volatile". The current code (the CVS
code) has changed A LOT. The persistence framework is different. The
work is under way and should be finished in some more days.
Would it be better to download more recent code from the CVS
repository than use the current version available from the
download section of the site?
Yes, particularly if you start now using xmlBlaster (even the client
side changed considerably).
Also, I have a need in the project I'm researching this for
to send messages in PtP mode and make them persistent (durable).
I've managed to do this, but I haven't figured out how to erase
them. The erase() method used on standard pub/sub messages
doesn't seem to work for this.
Normally ptp messages which are delivered are removed from memory.
If I understand you right, you want to erase a Ptp message which is
waiting to be delivered to the destination ? I think this is not solved
in the new code either (would need a specific plugin i think). If on the
other hand you want to delete a message which has been around too long
you can set an expiry time (with forceErase='true') and that should do it.
Any help with any of these issues is appreciated!
By the way I adapted the files you sent me to make them run with the new
CVS code and tested them to get the OutOfMemory exception with the
default command line settings and I am not getting any out of memory
(with file sizes of 6MB and 200 runs).