activemq-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Hiram Chirino" <hi...@hiramchirino.com>
Subject Re: jencks or spring 2.0
Date Thu, 27 Jul 2006 17:21:13 GMT
On 7/27/06, James Strachan <james.strachan@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On 7/27/06, Paul French <paul.french@frenchiesystems.com> wrote:
> >
> > Thanks James, Judging from the mailing lists you are a very busy man!!
> >
> > I think you misunderstood my question?
> >
> > Does Jencks pool sessions OR connections when using JMS?
>
> It pools both
>
>
> > Using Spring SingleConnectionFactory we reuse the same connection.
> However
> > Spring will create a new session and consumer/producer on the fly when
> using
> > the JmsTemplate. Hence my question:
> >
> >
> > Is a new session object fairly lightweight? (from the point of view of
> > creating it)
>
> Not in term of latency as it requires a blocking request-response with
> a broker. Ditto when creating/closing producers/consumers.


Actually, creating/closing a session and producer uses async one way
messages.  So, latencey should not be an issue unless you are bandwith
constrained.
But creating/closing consumers does use a blocking RPC.

So even using SingleConnectionFactory with JmsTemplate to send 1
> message will require 4 request responses purely for the session &
> producer - then another one to send the message (if you are not using
> async sends). Async sending can't really help avoid the 4 blocking
> request-responses that JmsTemplate introduces.
>
>
> > Hence using Jencks would you not still have to create a
> producer/consumer on
> > the fly for each of your working threads?
>
> Jencks pools them.
>
> --
>
> James
> -------
> http://radio.weblogs.com/0112098/
>



-- 
Regards,
Hiram

Blog: http://hiramchirino.com

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message