Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-activemq-users-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 15093 invoked from network); 11 May 2009 05:57:30 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.3) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 11 May 2009 05:57:30 -0000 Received: (qmail 56629 invoked by uid 500); 11 May 2009 05:57:30 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-activemq-users-archive@activemq.apache.org Received: (qmail 56559 invoked by uid 500); 11 May 2009 05:57:29 -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 56549 invoked by uid 99); 11 May 2009 05:57:29 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (140.211.11.136) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 11 May 2009 05:57:29 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.0 required=10.0 tests=SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of rajdavies@gmail.com designates 74.125.44.154 as permitted sender) Received: from [74.125.44.154] (HELO yx-out-1718.google.com) (74.125.44.154) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 11 May 2009 05:57:20 +0000 Received: by yx-out-1718.google.com with SMTP id 3so1645565yxi.86 for ; Sun, 10 May 2009 22:56:59 -0700 (PDT) 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=Se+LlY8x8FuGMExp6FDwVMvL256KkOU7KHVzpU/gqtQ=; b=uj1xhMihjJGI5XDDOzVAwRapF8YqnrlBggP2Hqn4ul4BrESAQO3yPwZIw/msYdXjNu 4EyzyCGnw7kROmpZhN5iwOJL6pY1iRIUkcqpqMYoeXSjR3THk36V0p5TLZavvsDr6QFa 7jhCGf5XIyp6BV+nyDSmiRna+FuFyzNBGrQtI= 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=vNoRETKgxZVmUZP8JaGEgj7Uvc2MnCBFzS/OYn2taVsbv8K4LddL950+8Ul6VGrzEg iL2lmVLhd4vpHUucVKQdz8t9qeJJBOz3VSyLMDwKlJwBTMnuSiAHHBt0dP5r+cFBp0U0 BFX/yosayCEqKc0RWH0lJSS760Xtrds1yK6/8= Received: by 10.100.44.4 with SMTP id r4mr15869354anr.157.1242021418098; Sun, 10 May 2009 22:56:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ?192.168.1.85? ([81.147.86.46]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id d35sm10762616and.15.2009.05.10.22.56.56 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Sun, 10 May 2009 22:56:57 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <810DBBB3-569F-4FFB-B301-A4AFB001A465@gmail.com> From: Rob Davies To: users@activemq.apache.org In-Reply-To: <4A07BCF2.8030504@tweakers.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v930.3) Subject: Re: too many open files Date: Mon, 11 May 2009 06:56:53 +0100 References: <23473539.post@talk.nabble.com> <4A07BCF2.8030504@tweakers.net> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.930.3) X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org thanks Arjen - need to get add a Faq entry for this! On 11 May 2009, at 06:51, Arjen van der Meijden wrote: > There may be at one or more of these three issues that I ran into: > > - You actually have a too low setting for the open files. Try > increasing it (see man ulimit etc, be careful that normally only > root can increase it beyond 1024, but other programs, including su > do inherit it). > > - You're opening and closing connections too fast, this is what we > had: > http://issues.apache.org/activemq/browse/AMQ-1739 > Adding the "?transport.closeAsync=false"-parameter to the url helped > us here. > > - You're queues may be getting larger than the limits. Especially > the 5mb per queue limit in the default configuration is easy to hit. > Once I raised the global limits and removed the per-queue/topic > limits it has worked stable for several months in a row (since feb > 19 our single broker has queued and dequeued over 300M tiny messages). > > 30 and 250 producers isn't that many, so unless they're maxing out > your broker system on some other resource than file pointers, my > guess is the single machine should be able to handle them. > > Best regards, > > Arjen > > On 10-5-2009 22:03 DataMover wrote: >> I have seems several posts on this but I have not been able to >> solve our >> situation. >> We have 30 clients (producers) working with one activemq server. >> All worked amazingly well. >> Then we tried a test with around 250 clients. >> That would get many transport errors. >> Increasing the file limits on the os caused the system to come to a >> crawl >> with no benefit. >> I am assuming the problem can be solved with multiple brokers being >> run. >> One question is do they have to be on different machines, or can we >> have >> multiple activemqs running on the same server, each listening on a >> different >> ip?