Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-activemq-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 9756 invoked from network); 3 Sep 2008 16:47:30 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.2) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 3 Sep 2008 16:47:30 -0000 Received: (qmail 54532 invoked by uid 500); 3 Sep 2008 16:47:27 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-activemq-dev-archive@activemq.apache.org Received: (qmail 54514 invoked by uid 500); 3 Sep 2008 16:47:27 -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 54503 invoked by uid 99); 3 Sep 2008 16:47:27 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (140.211.11.136) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 03 Sep 2008 09:47:27 -0700 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 gary.tully@gmail.com designates 209.85.217.15 as permitted sender) Received: from [209.85.217.15] (HELO mail-gx0-f15.google.com) (209.85.217.15) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 03 Sep 2008 16:46:29 +0000 Received: by gxk8 with SMTP id 8so5960730gxk.14 for ; Wed, 03 Sep 2008 09:46:59 -0700 (PDT) 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=lC8QbsJQSraTVFWIVN4rgZuwjCKZ5sEZyXBWE5KkVc4=; b=EUJguMCcEUKoA4xr+Oivkd2dUaKH6FNfj6O8yF+p74LAJxjANaSq56NnGduPtHMvZt bUSCwU5i05RdjSkjiEyr+OSBgCoYE4LMDCsFobxIYIvv1dTE1tx51HK7YlETHpLjy18v 4AhUtlwDJa3VrScoOXFxaOC1d0/F/pVWuE2Pw= 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=Lcfp5YgUoCvWD/w5Ue+OCf0LupMJIRERE6dlE4dDt0TmWWf+/5V0NLNIcnF7OyeSzI CetvmSb5seq+FA+yIGLulF0l3Wm8JDMDk6WX6sHRjwRpGTxlrLm6oslB3uMPkIt4epTo PJKpfOv0D+G8bdNKKmL6KcL65JQSQIvyLyhT4= Received: by 10.150.230.8 with SMTP id c8mr12731875ybh.47.1220460419874; Wed, 03 Sep 2008 09:46:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.150.138.18 with HTTP; Wed, 3 Sep 2008 09:46:59 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <3a73c17c0809030946s2249bf9aie412d2a66b17c3f7@mail.gmail.com> Date: Wed, 3 Sep 2008 17:46:59 +0100 From: "Gary Tully" To: dev@activemq.apache.org Subject: Re: How to intercept the creation of ActiveMQConnections? In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <7b3355cb0808200933o1ae8696cy39442fa5d9d974@mail.gmail.com> <7b3355cb0808210819w400027e1k3286249b8b1e0156@mail.gmail.com> <7b3355cb0809021109k682b17bcud2d9338e63baccc4@mail.gmail.com> <7b3355cb0809021455r7ba29e59sec4d66a7d7655851@mail.gmail.com> <3a73c17c0809030138k5042f024yc4d9d692a76d9aff@mail.gmail.com> <3a73c17c0809030851pab229f8g4736d641b214f6d@mail.gmail.com> X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org > Though number of connections in no way reflects the cpu usage of a > broker; > what are you thinking here? I am thinking that typically there will be a direct correlation between cpu usage and number of connections. In particular a broker with no connections will use very little cpu, add a steady producer via a connection and things start to happen, another connection a consumer or producer and more utilisation will occur etc. Agreed a plugable strategy is best but on the 80/20 rule I am thinking raw number of connections is a reasonable metric. Consumers and producers may already be partitioned by the application. Am I missing something here?