powered by Jive Software

Issue with OfflineMessageStore & Monitoring Plugin

OF 4.6.0-Snapshot
MessagePlugin 2.0.1-Snapshot
RHEL 8 with Java 8

Issue:

  • OfflineMessageStore is set to “drop” or “bounce”

  • User A chats with User B

  • User B goes offline, User A sends messages to User B

    Messages will be saved in Message Archive

  • User B comes online again and receives messages from MAM (all offline messages)

  • User A is writing further messages to User B

  • BUT: these new messages (when User A is allready online) will never arrive at User B. (But the messages are stored in MAM.)

  • BUT: If User B sends a message to User A, then User B will get messages from User A again.

*1) Is OfflineMessageStore needed allthough MAM will save these messages too?

Edit: I noticed that chat states notifications will be delivered from OF.

@totzkotz

First i suggest you to use stable version rather then snapshot versions.

The case you explained here is very strange the both the user is online and still couldn’t get the message. Hope both user has set presence available.

1. Offline storage

  • Offline message store will help you to undelivered message while other user is offline or set presence as unavailable.

  • So you need not to load manual from MAM as soon as you login server will start flooding the message which was undelivered due to presence unavailable.

  • Offline message storage has nothing to play a role while both the user is online.

2. MAM

  • MAM will store each message even if you are online/offline on x sec time interval. so it doesn’t care about the user is online or offline.

Hope this helps

thanks for the answer but,

my Snapshot is one after the release commit, so in fact it is the release with a new versionnumber.

I know what MAM and Offline Storage will do. I have already written some code for OF to on github.

And as i have written above is that User B nevertheless gets the chat states notification of User A that he is writing and so on… but the messages themself never arrive.

So sadly your answer does not help.
I would declare it as a bug :wink: