activemq-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From cmoulliard <cmoulli...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Protocol to be used in a broker topolgy (same JVM)
Date Mon, 08 Mar 2010 16:52:34 GMT

You are right. My question concerns an hypothetical network of broker and it
makes no sense to use it in such.

Charles


bsnyder wrote:
> 
> On Mon, Mar 8, 2010 at 1:55 AM, cmoulliard <cmoulliard@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I presume that when we create a network of 2 brokers running in the same
>> jvm, it makes more sense to use the vm:// as the protocol to interconnect
>> the master broker with the slave ?
>>
>>        <networkConnectors>
>>            <networkConnector uri="static://(vm://localhost:61617)"/>
>>        </networkConnectors>
>>
>> So, we can boost performance for transferring messages from one broker to
>> another and reduce cpu/memory consumption ?
> 
> Yes, use of the VM transport will certainly eliminate the use of the
> TCP stack, but I question the value of a broker network that exists in
> a single JVM.
> 
> Bruce
> -- 
> perl -e 'print
> unpack("u30","D0G)U8V4\@4VYY9&5R\"F)R=6-E+G-N>61E<D\!G;6%I;\"YC;VT*"
> );'
> 
> ActiveMQ in Action: http://bit.ly/2je6cQ
> Blog: http://bruceblog.org/
> Twitter: http://twitter.com/brucesnyder
> 
> 


-----
Charles Moulliard
SOA Architect

My Blog :  http://cmoulliard.blogspot.com/ http://cmoulliard.blogspot.com/  
-- 
View this message in context: http://old.nabble.com/Protocol-to-be-used-in-a-broker-topolgy-%28same-JVM%29-tp27818595p27824076.html
Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.


Mime
View raw message