From users-return-23618-apmail-activemq-users-archive=activemq.apache.org@activemq.apache.org Tue May 11 20:24:05 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-activemq-users-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 34641 invoked from network); 11 May 2010 20:24:05 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.3) by 140.211.11.9 with SMTP; 11 May 2010 20:24:05 -0000 Received: (qmail 44002 invoked by uid 500); 11 May 2010 20:24:05 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-activemq-users-archive@activemq.apache.org Received: (qmail 43976 invoked by uid 500); 11 May 2010 20:24:05 -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 43968 invoked by uid 99); 11 May 2010 20:24:05 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (140.211.11.136) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 11 May 2010 20:24:05 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.7 required=10.0 tests=AWL,FREEMAIL_FROM,SPF_PASS,T_TO_NO_BRKTS_FREEMAIL X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of bruce.snyder@gmail.com designates 209.85.161.43 as permitted sender) Received: from [209.85.161.43] (HELO mail-fx0-f43.google.com) (209.85.161.43) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 11 May 2010 20:24:01 +0000 Received: by fxm14 with SMTP id 14so11407419fxm.2 for ; Tue, 11 May 2010 13:23:39 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:received:in-reply-to :references:date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; bh=sWzrs8JuOY19I7DYNnzjO3QOuBKxE5oBm8jN2xuG8xg=; b=UbABYZ3YHnSCFjpvnxJVs7gmnTtTPcQf0tQqnEpTrXTUV1Ju0wLJ5oYW01xa43uC88 3mPQt8EsB6gEKWT44LUf6/zujBRBeJGXpibn5wl4OHo5bIIZJ4FQ0FRkFUODKgkentF4 jcr4JakeESJ4nLzWO4AGGdVPnMuOtYlBP6jLE= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; b=VJlGXgIKU7T2YRGVyQ8+ops7mO/qHezokNoxPaUvEvvcudzeVHi0ebWcSQ8d5uxImj ZYegoFRLDM5Vm3gAyIt9K7cD6f2Tc9s8S5VuJj5F8paE9SKd+FTFGMMOM+IJaxUtv+O0 2k4E4CzIFpoKzqLFpCAqMKq9BnO7fG84Kcz6c= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.204.2.210 with SMTP id 18mr469328bkk.15.1273609419589; Tue, 11 May 2010 13:23:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.204.117.197 with HTTP; Tue, 11 May 2010 13:23:39 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <28528486.post@talk.nabble.com> References: <4BE9AA99.9060309@bryanmoore.com> <28528486.post@talk.nabble.com> Date: Tue, 11 May 2010 14:23:39 -0600 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Message Send is fast with TCP transport, slow when using Discovery From: Bruce Snyder To: users@activemq.apache.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 On Tue, May 11, 2010 at 1:39 PM, Bryan Moore wrote: > > True, but if you notice, I use Async in both cases. Well the discovery transport starts an embedded failover transport which imposes some extra overhead for asynchronous reconnections. Not to mention the creation of the discovery agent itself. What type of discovery agent are you using? Bruce -- perl -e 'print unpack("u30","D0G)U8V4\@4VYY9&5R\"F)R=6-E+G-N>61E