Description of problem: Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): qpidd-0.5.752581-8.el5 How reproducible: 100% Steps to Reproduce: 1. start one node 2. create a queue with ring policy and fixed count (e.g. qpid-config add queue test-queue --max-queue-count 5 --limit-policy ring) 3. send some messages to the queue (e.g. for m in one two three four five; do echo $m; done | ./qpid/cpp/src/tests/sender) 4. receive but don't yet ack a message (e.g. start and leave running: ./qpid/cpp/src/tests/receiver --ack-frequency 10 --credit-window 1) 5. add new node to cluster 6. release (or consume) message from step 4 (e.g. kill receiver started in step 4) 7. check messages on each node (e.g. by running ./qpid/cpp/src/tests/receiver --browse --messages 5 against each node in turn) Actual results: Nodes show different set of messages e.g. first node: two three four five six second node: one three four five six Expected results: Messages reported from each node should be the same. Additional info:
Sorry, missed one step in reproducer above. Between steps 5 and 6 need to send another message to the queue (e.g. echo six | ./qpid/cpp/src/tests/sender)
Created attachment 345774 [details] Fix (created against code for 752581-8)
Fixed in qpidd-0.5.752581-10.
Tested on RHEL 5.3 i386/x86_64 qpidd-0.5.752581-10.el5 and it works --> VERIFIED.
This is not fully fixed; if the sixth message is sent *before* the second node is added to the cluster in the case above then the queues remain inconsitent after the join.
Created attachment 346706 [details] Further fix (created against code for 752581-12)
This second case is fixed in qpidd-0.5.752581-13.el5
Tested on RHEL 5.3 i386/x86_64 qpidd-0.5.752581-13.el5 and it works as we expected in Comment 5 --> VERIFIED.
An advisory has been issued which should help the problem described in this bug report. This report is therefore being closed with a resolution of ERRATA. For more information on therefore solution and/or where to find the updated files, please follow the link below. You may reopen this bug report if the solution does not work for you. http://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHBA-2009-1097.html