Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-activemq-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 82226 invoked from network); 7 Mar 2008 11:42:32 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.2) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 7 Mar 2008 11:42:32 -0000 Received: (qmail 88240 invoked by uid 500); 7 Mar 2008 11:42:28 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-activemq-dev-archive@activemq.apache.org Received: (qmail 88208 invoked by uid 500); 7 Mar 2008 11:42:28 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@activemq.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: dev@activemq.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list dev@activemq.apache.org Received: (qmail 88199 invoked by uid 99); 7 Mar 2008 11:42:27 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (140.211.11.136) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 07 Mar 2008 03:42:27 -0800 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.0 required=10.0 tests=SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of james.strachan@gmail.com designates 64.233.170.186 as permitted sender) Received: from [64.233.170.186] (HELO rn-out-0910.google.com) (64.233.170.186) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 07 Mar 2008 11:41:51 +0000 Received: by rn-out-0910.google.com with SMTP id j40so608204rnf.4 for ; Fri, 07 Mar 2008 03:41:38 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; bh=jmTxbjQTi6AH92ud3I0gR7c+09ePjIv6EIH61uA4CTU=; b=jYpsEiV2M3ZdltXL/IUoT3Y0WJJKFzIwEt2s14+arlJx5vX/wCiTRLqllIn+u4RF42gxn/TyjVsvtJ6mhGOHHbFirNx2T+d5zof7aZSB6LEVrToJqbn1ikeIActEqdA/Ugwi+8O7o5tzzWOac98gNUl+Xlh2O9WkR/KZc6+udFA= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=wwu/Jbi7YiV809YU3jrl1js0sJwZoIVzF/ziDEEGlEfzUPfBcfp/FXKuLEDY7PwD3K6llcbv0ggFJwRLoxmVRUDoLRDHHzrWi+F7Fxbd8ruScH0Yu74UwWtmAf8bwv2SLujhwdGzgBdbe6nArMsIQ7vKAUb/vOxyDqOBeG25wuk= Received: by 10.150.190.9 with SMTP id n9mr426297ybf.127.1204890097919; Fri, 07 Mar 2008 03:41:37 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.150.148.20 with HTTP; Fri, 7 Mar 2008 03:41:37 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: Date: Fri, 7 Mar 2008 11:41:37 +0000 From: "James Strachan" To: dev@activemq.apache.org Subject: Re: Queue performance from recent changes In-Reply-To: <47D074BC.2010407@nuix.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <20080218094428.843041A9832@eris.apache.org> <47BA6480.4020604@nuix.com> <2C159E97-AD73-4BB1-879C-0505B6B6E801@gmail.com> <47BA9424.9040701@nuix.com> <93C79F5E-8F0C-4B65-B7A9-21687FD00CD0@gmail.com> <47BBC94B.8010302@nuix.com> <47CF8732.7020600@nuix.com> <0AA2DC4F-55F6-400B-BD40-FE17472C1A7B@gmail.com> <47D074BC.2010407@nuix.com> X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org On 06/03/2008, David Sitsky wrote: > I am sure it will be application-dependent, so making it a policy makes > a lot of sense. For my application, I only have a pending size of 1 > since each work item's processing requirements can vary tremendously. I wonder could the same code be smart enough to work in the 2 different modes based on the prefetch size? i.e. use the default if the consumers's prefetch size is > 100 or something or use David's approach if its smaller If not then using destination policies sounds fine to me; just wondered if we could be smart enough to use the right policy based on the consumer configuration? -- James ------- http://macstrac.blogspot.com/ Open Source Integration http://open.iona.com