activemq-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "James Strachan" <>
Subject Re: Are there any figures about ActiveMQ's scalability
Date Wed, 06 Jun 2007 09:34:17 GMT
On 5/29/07, Ames, Andreas (Andreas) <> wrote:
> Hi all,
> I'm in the process of evaluating ActiveMQ in a callcenter setting.
> I'm unable to find figures about its scalability.
> In my scenario I'll have a typical middletier server 'connected'
> to a diversity of frontend clients via ActiveMQ.  That will mean
> about 6000 pub/sub-channels for event delivery with at most two or
> three producers and a varying number of consumers.  Unfortunately
> I'll also have to provide some request/response-support.  I've
> read the recommendation to use temporary queues to deliver the
> responses.  As I might need to support (in the worst case) up to
> 500 clients, I'm concerned about scalability (500 queues
> additionally).

The number of destinations doesn't really matter; its really just a
RAM overhead in the broker; a small amount of RAM is used for each

Whats more relevant is how many connections the broker has to maintain
(as a socket & thread is usually used per connection) and some OSes
have a limit of the maximum sockets/threads per process (which you can
often increase). e.g. on a small linux box I've tested 2000
connections on a single broker which works fine.

Also message throughput is something to consider; but usually a single
broker can deal with most common loading requirements

> I'm only talking about non-persistent messages for the moment.
> I'm not yet decided about duplicate acks at the moment, I'll need to
> read a bit more and do some experimentation.
> I'm expecting a maximum of about 12-15 messages per second at the
> moment.

Thats pretty low; so a single oldish PC should do the trick for the broker

> I'm currently planning for a single (TCP-) connection per client
> (=> max. 500).
> So out of your experience, would you say that a single broker can
> 'easily' stand this load or should I I plan with a broker network
> right from the beginning?

I'd say a single broker could easily handle double those numbers of
connections and 10x the message throughputs - on a cheap/old PC. On a
nice newish blade you might be able to add another zero to those


View raw message