activemq-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From pradeep <pradeepzm...@gmail.com>
Subject RE: Paging support
Date Tue, 05 Sep 2006 17:07:09 GMT

Maxim,

Can you clarify this
Are you storing just the message id or the whole message in memory? Your
help will be highly appreciated.

Thanks
pradeep


Fateev, Maxim wrote:
> 
> It would be interesting to see some numbers about memory utilization per
> message in backlog.
> 
> IMHO the main problem with keeping references in memory is that it needs
> recovery phase on broker startup. It can take a while when backlog is
> really big. 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: James Strachan [mailto:james.strachan@gmail.com] 
> Sent: Sunday, September 03, 2006 11:51 PM
> To: activemq-users@geronimo.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Paging support
> 
> Note that MessageReferences != message contents; they are mostly just a
> MessageId which is pretty small.
> 
> On 8/29/06, Fateev, Maxim <fateev@amazon.com> wrote:
>> AFAIK messages are moved from journal to permantent storage (JDBC) on
>> every checkpoint. The problem is that references for every message are
>> still kept in memory.
>> IMHO it is inherent limitation of MessageStore API as it is defined now.
>> The only way to get message is by id. And the only way to have id is to
>> keep it in memory.
>> I'm looking into changing MessageStore API to one that instead of
>>
>> Message         getMessage(MessageId identity)
>>
>> Would provide
>>
>> Message getNextMessage()
>>
>> method eliminating need to keep references in memory.
>>
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Anders Bengtsson [mailto:ndrsbngtssn@yahoo.se]
>> Sent: Tuesday, August 29, 2006 1:23 AM
>> To: activemq-users@geronimo.apache.org
>> Subject: Re: Paging support
>>
>>
>>
>> gnodet wrote:
>> >
>> > If you don' t use any persistent store, messages must be kept in 
>> > memory, so you are obvisouly limited by the available mem.
>> >
>>
>> Yes, this is what I would expect.
>>
>>
>>
>> > If you use a jdbc store, messages can be removed from memory and 
>> > store for later consumption.
>> >
>>
>> Yes, except it doesn't actually work!
>>
>> It writes things to the store, but it is still very much limited by
>> memory for some reason. (Someone reported this as AMQ-845 earlier, but
>> with no response).
>>
>> --
>> View this message in context: 
>> http://www.nabble.com/Paging-support-tf2163517.html#a6034790
>> Sent from the ActiveMQ - User forum at Nabble.com.
>>
> 
> 
> -- 
> 
> James
> -------
> http://radio.weblogs.com/0112098/
> 
> 

-- 
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Paging-support-tf2163517.html#a6156162
Sent from the ActiveMQ - User forum at Nabble.com.


Mime
View raw message