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: surprising performance tuning result with activemq 4.0.1
Date Wed, 11 Oct 2006 13:39:22 GMT
On 10/11/06, Jamie McCrindle <jamiemccrindle@gmail.com> wrote:
> in the test, yes it is.

OK - I just wondered that maybe the journal was on a slower/heavily
used disk and SQLServer was using a faster one :0


> would the journal and sqlserver be queing behind
> each other for io?

The ideal scenario for using the journal is for it to use a dedicated
disk and be the only writer, so the disk head doesn't need to do
seeks, it can just keep writing to the end of a file etc.

Am wondering if you're hitting a slightly different issue though - of
the RAM / gc impact of using the journal causing pauses versus the
much simpler write to JDBC

BTW it'd be interesting to see the performance if you tried kaha
instead of JDBC, just to get an idea of relative speed

-- 

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

Mime
View raw message