Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-geronimo-activemq-users-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 51940 invoked from network); 18 Oct 2006 22:41:54 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (209.237.227.199) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 18 Oct 2006 22:41:54 -0000 Received: (qmail 34428 invoked by uid 500); 18 Oct 2006 22:41:53 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-geronimo-activemq-users-archive@geronimo.apache.org Received: (qmail 34404 invoked by uid 500); 18 Oct 2006 22:41:53 -0000 Mailing-List: contact activemq-users-help@geronimo.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: activemq-users@geronimo.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list activemq-users@geronimo.apache.org Received: (qmail 34390 invoked by uid 99); 18 Oct 2006 22:41:53 -0000 Received: from asf.osuosl.org (HELO asf.osuosl.org) (140.211.166.49) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 18 Oct 2006 15:41:53 -0700 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=2.5 required=10.0 tests=DNS_FROM_RFC_ABUSE,HTML_MESSAGE,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (asf.osuosl.org: domain of chirino@gmail.com designates 64.233.182.187 as permitted sender) Received: from [64.233.182.187] (HELO nf-out-0910.google.com) (64.233.182.187) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 18 Oct 2006 15:41:51 -0700 Received: by nf-out-0910.google.com with SMTP id p77so824625nfc for ; Wed, 18 Oct 2006 15:41:30 -0700 (PDT) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:sender:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:references:x-google-sender-auth; b=X/gQK5A0DAwhF14IQ3wR3I2KEQNOM5otyEVEMfblQe6K26bSZCIjXEvaIXkI9vNQxfKIIGVyeAcSFmm0UpQmR2Yeuyt0fBmfb+yp0ogZ9YtlgujZC4SCj17UoCfIVr0HNLn0SM8ADPJkyytft/XqSElk/w/EuCtqzrQpzzd/caQ= Received: by 10.78.128.15 with SMTP id a15mr10788020hud; Wed, 18 Oct 2006 15:41:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.78.142.5 with HTTP; Wed, 18 Oct 2006 15:41:29 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2006 17:41:29 -0500 From: "Hiram Chirino" Sender: chirino@gmail.com To: activemq-users@geronimo.apache.org Subject: Re: NMS problem In-Reply-To: <6879166.post@talk.nabble.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_Part_76471_14826105.1161211289637" References: <6866102.post@talk.nabble.com> <6867337.post@talk.nabble.com> <6879166.post@talk.nabble.com> X-Google-Sender-Auth: 049f67324b27e848 X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org X-Spam-Rating: minotaur.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N ------=_Part_76471_14826105.1161211289637 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline On 10/18/06, robottaway wrote: > > > Sorry James I am just a picky guy :) I know I won't need to do multiple > connections quickly but I was just pointing it out (and wondering why it > takes so long to connect with NMS). Is there a way to speed up the > connection process? With STOMP or the normal JMS AMQ connections are fast. > Is the protocol in C# just heavier? Or is it C# itself is causing the > slowness. The C# client is using the same exact protocol as the JMS client.. so if the C# stuff seems slower to connect than the java version, then we very likely are doing something silly in the implementation of the C# client. Remember that it was a few Java guys that threw the C# client together! But we are starting to get a bunch of C# expert eyes looking at the C# client now which is very exciting! So.. in theory, the C# should be as fast as the Java stuff. If it's not, please pitch in help us figure out why not! -- Regards, Hiram Blog: http://hiramchirino.com ------=_Part_76471_14826105.1161211289637--