From dev-return-14879-apmail-activemq-dev-archive=activemq.apache.org@activemq.apache.org Mon Mar 30 10:43:06 2009 Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-activemq-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 75645 invoked from network); 30 Mar 2009 10:43:06 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.3) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 30 Mar 2009 10:43:06 -0000 Received: (qmail 8334 invoked by uid 500); 30 Mar 2009 10:43:05 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-activemq-dev-archive@activemq.apache.org Received: (qmail 8299 invoked by uid 500); 30 Mar 2009 10:43:05 -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 8289 invoked by uid 99); 30 Mar 2009 10:43:05 -0000 Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (192.87.106.230) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 30 Mar 2009 10:43:05 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2000.0 required=10.0 tests=ALL_TRUSTED X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received: from [140.211.11.140] (HELO brutus.apache.org) (140.211.11.140) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 30 Mar 2009 10:43:03 +0000 Received: from brutus (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by brutus.apache.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DA6F6234C041 for ; Mon, 30 Mar 2009 03:42:42 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <893365548.1238409762893.JavaMail.jira@brutus> Date: Mon, 30 Mar 2009 03:42:42 -0700 (PDT) From: =?UTF-8?Q?Thomas_Sch=C3=B6ftner_=28JIRA=29?= To: dev@activemq.apache.org Subject: [jira] Commented: (AMQ-2136) Reply queue performance hit upgrading to 5.2 In-Reply-To: <209012163.1235253179425.JavaMail.jira@brutus> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-JIRA-FingerPrint: ae95407df07c98740808b2ef9da0087c X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org [ https://issues.apache.org/activemq/browse/AMQ-2136?page=3Dcom.atlassi= an.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=3D50= 894#action_50894 ]=20 Thomas Sch=C3=B6ftner commented on AMQ-2136: --------------------------------------- I have a similar performance problem using ActiveMQ via Spring 2.5.6. Due to performance issues, I created a load-test for evaluation of the mess= aging performance: The test basically sends 1000 messages which are later retrieved by 100 sim= ultaneous consumers. Each consumer waits 1 sec before returning the acknowledgement - every 10th= consumer waits 10 secs. Theoretically, all messges should be successfully handled in ~20secs. With ActiveMQ 5.1, it takes ~50secs, but with 5.2 it's even slower (90secs)= . This is strange because the server and consumer configuration has not chang= ed. Switching from AmqPersistance to KahaPersistance has no effect either. BTW, currently there is no TransactionManager used. Any ideas where to start looking? - Thx. > Reply queue performance hit upgrading to 5.2 > -------------------------------------------- > > Key: AMQ-2136 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/activemq/browse/AMQ-2136 > Project: ActiveMQ > Issue Type: Bug > Components: Performance Test > Affects Versions: 5.2.0 > Environment: Windows Vista, JDK 1.6 > Reporter: H B > Priority: Critical > Attachments: test.java > > > When upgrading to AMQ 5.2, my application gets 10x slower. This is traced= to the usage of reply queue. I have written a test case (will be attached.= ) > In 5.1, > sender: 16.0 seconds spent for sending 8000 times, avg. 500.0msg/s > In 5.2: > sender: 432.0 seconds spent for sending 10000 times, avg. 23.148148msg/s > I have tried arrange the steps a bit (see commented out line,) no help. --=20 This message is automatically generated by JIRA. - You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.