From users-return-7735-apmail-activemq-users-archive=activemq.apache.org@activemq.apache.org Mon Mar 05 07:49:36 2007 Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-activemq-users-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 88697 invoked from network); 5 Mar 2007 07:49:34 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.2) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 5 Mar 2007 07:49:34 -0000 Received: (qmail 55181 invoked by uid 500); 5 Mar 2007 07:49:41 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-activemq-users-archive@activemq.apache.org Received: (qmail 55126 invoked by uid 500); 5 Mar 2007 07:49:41 -0000 Mailing-List: contact users-help@activemq.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: users@activemq.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list users@activemq.apache.org Received: (qmail 55096 invoked by uid 99); 5 Mar 2007 07:49:40 -0000 Received: from herse.apache.org (HELO herse.apache.org) (140.211.11.133) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Sun, 04 Mar 2007 23:49:40 -0800 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.0 required=10.0 tests=SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (herse.apache.org: domain of james.strachan@gmail.com designates 64.233.182.184 as permitted sender) Received: from [64.233.182.184] (HELO nf-out-0910.google.com) (64.233.182.184) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Sun, 04 Mar 2007 23:49:29 -0800 Received: by nf-out-0910.google.com with SMTP id y38so1994229nfb for ; Sun, 04 Mar 2007 23:49:07 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=FJv/tUE94ffEeheK1WmQ3awUlx26ZpVy3N0hdyOQlRzP13c+9Fp47/bQ5hwLFU9kXd4rO/e5IESW+SOmwnrSaH2dXa/9pVrqWOVHG1zz1pshWS87hjdNvqynVwwfNMqOWbcj5puWDn2ftvef2oZOLljrq5nj45/l+Cgo9c6oA1Y= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=a9ieR7G3/nyKbE+JrtO+w+L9MFit39hq+bowUSITZa1D68Su0KnVSiiFdFZTHui3seYQbnnFbH6sJuUeJATheeY4bVtYwTkDG8AokkV/grHi7tUpnZ5FJNeyN2Wkp3NrE8QqgOLGMShihUgFZudxjRjSnnCN9saFcIwLaQ8vDPA= Received: by 10.78.183.15 with SMTP id g15mr580652huf.1173080946183; Sun, 04 Mar 2007 23:49:06 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.78.155.11 with HTTP; Sun, 4 Mar 2007 23:49:06 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: Date: Mon, 5 Mar 2007 07:49:06 +0000 From: "James Strachan" To: users@activemq.apache.org Subject: Re: Please help: Performance issue with persistence In-Reply-To: <9304224.post@talk.nabble.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <9304224.post@talk.nabble.com> X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org On 3/5/07, naga007 wrote: > > We are noticing significant performance degradation with persistence > turned on, when the no of concurrent users is more than 50. What do you mean by users? Producers, consumers, sessions, connections? Its a bit hard to offer advice on optimisations without any real details of what your application is doing - more details might help. e.g. how many messages are you trying to send; are you using queues or topics, what exactly is it you are measuring, (latency v throughput), are you getting spikes of cpu? -- James ------- http://radio.weblogs.com/0112098/