activemq-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "James Strachan" <james.strac...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Use/misuse of JMS Streams
Date Wed, 02 Aug 2006 06:27:14 GMT
If network bandwidth is a big concern, I'd recommend you combine
multiple updates into a single message and consider using compression.
Using a JMS stream is one way to do this; though you will need to make
up your own framing protocol to be able to unpack the stream but its
certainly one possible way to group messages together. Under the
covers streams just create byte messages of a default size of 64K so
streams are a good way to minimise the overhead of the routing &
header information - though you could just do that yourself by
wrapping many events into a single message as well.


On 8/2/06, Kuppe <kuppe@360t.com> wrote:
> I suppose the main reason that i am looking for alternative ways to sending
> updated data is to reduce the overhead as much as possible for each of the
> updates. As i mentioned, only 1/12th of the data that i am writing to the
> socket is actually relevant information to the update... This is a large
> overhead! The question relates to whether much of the routing and contextual
> business information can be part of the initial message from which the
> client could then use for all updates that follow in the
> ActiveMQInputStream.
>
> To add more information to the reason of the question, I am looking to
> stream a large number of updates to remote clients. Here, bandwidth is of
> high significance... I am looking for the most efficient way to distribute
> many small updates and provide the highest possible throughput to the
> client. One way is to increase the bandwidth, but this is typically out of
> my control. Alternatively i can aggressively reduce the amount of data sent
> over the wire for each update. Reusing routing and context information is
> just one way that i could think of to reduce the amount of data required for
> each update...
>
> I am not sure of the underlying implementation, perhaps JMS Streams are
> simply mapped to multiple JMS Messages anyway (is that what you are
> suggestion?) and there is absolutely no benefit to gain from my
> suggestion... I was looking at the JMS Stream - namely the
> ActiveMQInputStream and ActiveMQOutputStream as some sort of stream
> forwarding feature that is created between a producer and consumer of a
> specific message... Am i way off base???
> --
> View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Use-misuse-of-JMS-Streams-tf2037623.html#a5608253
> Sent from the ActiveMQ - User forum at Nabble.com.
>
>


-- 

James
-------
http://radio.weblogs.com/0112098/

Mime
View raw message