Return-Path: 
 <users-return-17663-apmail-activemq-users-archive=activemq.apache.org@activemq.apache.org>
Delivered-To: apmail-activemq-users-archive@www.apache.org
Received: (qmail 38587 invoked from network); 22 Jan 2009 14:05:54 -0000
Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.2)
  by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 22 Jan 2009 14:05:54 -0000
Received: (qmail 86361 invoked by uid 500); 22 Jan 2009 14:05:52 -0000
Delivered-To: apmail-activemq-users-archive@activemq.apache.org
Received: (qmail 86347 invoked by uid 500); 22 Jan 2009 14:05:52 -0000
Mailing-List: contact users-help@activemq.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Help: <mailto:users-help@activemq.apache.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:users-unsubscribe@activemq.apache.org>
List-Post: <mailto:users@activemq.apache.org>
List-Id: <users.activemq.apache.org>
Reply-To: users@activemq.apache.org
Delivered-To: mailing list users@activemq.apache.org
Received: (qmail 86336 invoked by uid 99); 22 Jan 2009 14:05:52 -0000
Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (140.211.11.136)
    by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 22 Jan 2009 06:05:52 -0800
X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.2 required=10.0
	tests=SPF_PASS,WHOIS_MYPRIVREG
X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of rajdavies@gmail.com
 designates 209.85.221.12 as permitted sender)
Received: from [209.85.221.12] (HELO mail-qy0-f12.google.com) (209.85.221.12)
    by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 22 Jan 2009 14:05:43 +0000
Received: by qyk5 with SMTP id 5so4608809qyk.14
        for <users@activemq.apache.org>; Thu, 22 Jan 2009 06:05:22 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
        d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
        h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:from:to
         :in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version
         :subject:date:references:x-mailer;
        bh=BZ2sW9Jvqshf3PznvEtcWxMfCYbBRjpCVdwLXARq92w=;
        b=JRb0LtB3F80jViS9FDrXLULIcPV45X0U+gkzykzlSBXk4b28ZvXMF8d+hwrJW1cYH9
         D4gFT+JyGkXpV+7wbgAzayaZNfdu4ioXRrHFZzs/+b9pEP9uR26eAMJBErq3bcqG1+oW
         wg0Pcrz3HlZ4Ibtc5CZXrAYCVmHOZDo8O+oNo=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
        d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
        h=message-id:from:to:in-reply-to:content-type
         :content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:subject:date:references
         :x-mailer;
        b=ZpI9re3syNASLujrKyWfVI5kbfDVmjh+hQo85xUF2Kws58IaY57DBRJgudx7x7v5vt
         7w2vA1p57tQ3jl1h5/ElAUSeb5BmjXeJJdNM8XPvEUKQOF/0WNiSlXkMp2WO4ivYwb2A
         4jk3LRiCkVbolZjQ82HLhJnLLG4XqrsbebZIA=
Received: by 10.215.40.2 with SMTP id s2mr10849476qaj.137.1232633122087;
        Thu, 22 Jan 2009 06:05:22 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ?192.168.1.76? (host86-168-83-211.range86-168.btcentralplus.com
 [86.168.83.211])
        by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id 7sm8248108qwf.47.2009.01.22.06.05.20
        (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5);
        Thu, 22 Jan 2009 06:05:21 -0800 (PST)
Message-Id: <31299B48-13A6-45A8-8410-160DBD4C521C@gmail.com>
From: Rob Davies <rajdavies@gmail.com>
To: users@activemq.apache.org
In-Reply-To: <21601585.post@talk.nabble.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed; delsp=yes
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v930.3)
Subject: Re: Performance in relation to queue size
Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2009 14:05:17 +0000
References: <21601585.post@talk.nabble.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.930.3)
X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org

The index will grow up to  a max number of bins - increasing that =20
maximum will increase performance - e.g.

    <bean id=3D"store"
class=3D"org.apache.activemq.store.amq.AMQPersistenceAdapter">
                <property name=3D"directory" value=3D"${activemq.base}/=20=

data"/>
                <property name=3D"maxFileLength" value=3D"10000000"/>
                <property name=3D"checkpointInterval" value=3D"60000"/>
                <property name=3D"cleanupInterval" value=3D"30000"/>
                <property name=3D"persistentIndex" value=3D"true"/>
  		<property name=3D"indexMaxBinSize" value=3D"131072"/>
        </bean>




cheers,

Rob

Rob Davies
http://fusesource.com
http://rajdavies.blogspot.com/


On 22 Jan 2009, at 10:32, Cybexion wrote:

>
> Hi,
>
> I have a queue that should hold up to 30 GB of small persistent =20
> messages:
> <systemUsage sendFailIfNoSpace=3D"true">
>                <memoryUsage>
>                    <memoryUsage limit=3D"1gb"/>
>                </memoryUsage>
>                <storeUsage>
>                    <storeUsage limit=3D"30gb" store=3D"#store"/>
>                </storeUsage>
>
> The queue consists of 10 MB files and are specified like this:
>       <bean id=3D"store"
> class=3D"org.apache.activemq.store.amq.AMQPersistenceAdapter">
>                <property name=3D"directory" value=3D"${activemq.base}/=20=

> data"/>
>                <property name=3D"maxFileLength" value=3D"10000000"/>
>                <property name=3D"checkpointInterval" value=3D"60000"/>
>                <property name=3D"cleanupInterval" value=3D"30000"/>
>                <property name=3D"persistentIndex" value=3D"true"/>
>        </bean>
>
> This night I made a test with lots of produceds an just 5 consumer. =20=

> I wanted
> to fill the queue to its limit.
> Well, so far I managed to send 18 Million messages into the queue. I =20=

> have 20
> % Store usage so far.
> What I noticed is, that mostly the messages are send within 0-20
> milliseconds. However sometimes I have a lot of messages which take =20=

> 10+
> seconds to be send. This is not good in my scenario. I need a =20
> producer that
> should be very very fast in sending the messages.
> Question now:
> Could it be that the number of data files or the size of the =20
> datafiles has
> impact on the performance?
> Would it be better to have one queue big file with 30GB of size =20
> instead of
> hundreds of files having 1 MB?
>
> The key index ist persistent. I tested this and it seems to be the =20
> only way
> of NOT getting an out of memory error.
> Does it make sense to change the indexkeysize or the indexpagesize =20
> in the
> store? Would this maybe gice additional constant performance?
>
> Btw:
> I'm using AMQ 5.2
>
> Thanks and best regards
>
> J=F6rg
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --=20
> View this message in context: =
http://www.nabble.com/Performance-in-relation-to-queue-size-tp21601585p216=
01585.html
> Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>