activemq-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Colin MacNaughton" <>
Subject RE: [VOTE] AciveMQ Protocol Buffers 1.0 and Apache ActiveMQ 5.3.0 releases
Date Mon, 21 Sep 2009 20:01:27 GMT
So ran into 2 issues running performance tests:

1. I ended up tweaking the default config to limit destination sizes and
enable flow control as follows:

     <policyEntry topic=">" producerFlowControl="true" memoryLimit="1mb">

     <policyEntry queue=">" producerFlowControl="true" memoryLimit="1mb"/>

The current default config was resulting in really high latencies in non
persistent pub sub tests (> 2 minutes!). With the new settings throughput
doubled and average latency dropped to 3 seconds.

However, it seems like there is some resistance to enabling flow control by
default:, as naïve users
might erroneously interpret this as a hang.

So there is a tradeoff here against guarding again naïve users and good out
of box performance benchmarking. 

A possible compromise appropriate for the 5.3.0 release time frame would be
to log a warning the first time flow control is triggered for a destination,
to assist naive users in troubleshooting producer pauses.

More long term, it might be worth introucing a more sophisticated mechanism
for when we page to disk like only do so when there are no consumers
connected. A policy similar to this is already being pursued in the amq 6.0

I logged this as

2. Fan-in to dups_ok queue receivers:
While running performance tests I I was seeing hangs in several tests
involving dups ok queue receivers. My suspicion is that this is related to
"too lazy" dups_ok acknowledgements. Changing the queue prefetchLimit to 100
caused this problem to go away. This needs more investigation, but it seems
like we can get ourselves in to trouble if the queue size is smaller than
the receiver's prefetchLimit, and this should be avoid. It is also possible
that there is something more complicated happening in my tests. I haven't
yet been able to reproduce this outside my performance test environment.

Logged as

-----Original Message-----
From: Colin MacNaughton [] 
Sent: Friday, September 18, 2009 12:49 PM
Subject: RE: [VOTE] AciveMQ Protocol Buffers 1.0 and Apache ActiveMQ 5.3.0

Hey Dejan,

FYI, I'm running the RC though the Progress internal performance test suite
over the weekend. Will advise of the results, but it should be interesting
to see how the new default config performs, and we can see if we need to
tweak it. 


-----Original Message-----
From: [] On Behalf Of Dejan
Sent: Friday, September 18, 2009 11:14 AM
Subject: Re: [VOTE] AciveMQ Protocol Buffers 1.0 and Apache ActiveMQ 5.3.0

Ok, I'll modify tomorrow how we create source release and include protobuf
code in it. I guess I'll need to tweak assembly-plugin and
apache-source-release-assembly-descriptor, but have to research it more on
how to do it. If anybody has any experience with this and would provide any
pointers it would be very helpful.

Dejan Bosanac

Open Source Integration -
ActiveMQ in Action -
Blog -

On Fri, Sep 18, 2009 at 7:02 PM, Hiram Chirino <> wrote:

> Yeah that that does not have the source tar ball for the protobuf release.
> On Fri, Sep 18, 2009 at 12:52 PM, Bruce Snyder <
> >wrote:
> > On Fri, Sep 18, 2009 at 7:10 AM, Hiram Chirino <>
> wrote:
> > > Could you also post links to the source tarballs?  Thanks!
> >
> > He already did:
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Bruce
> > --
> > perl -e 'print
> > unpack("u30","D0G)U8V4\@4VYY9&5R\"F)R=6-E+G-N>61E<D\!G;6%I;\"YC;VT*"
> > );'
> >
> > ActiveMQ in Action:
> > Blog:
> > Twitter:
> >
> --
> Regards,
> Hiram
> Blog:
> Open Source SOA

View raw message