Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-activemq-users-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 58359 invoked from network); 12 Oct 2010 17:14:30 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.3) by 140.211.11.9 with SMTP; 12 Oct 2010 17:14:30 -0000 Received: (qmail 73497 invoked by uid 500); 12 Oct 2010 17:14:30 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-activemq-users-archive@activemq.apache.org Received: (qmail 73478 invoked by uid 500); 12 Oct 2010 17:14:30 -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 73470 invoked by uid 99); 12 Oct 2010 17:14:30 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (140.211.11.136) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 12 Oct 2010 17:14:30 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=2.3 required=10.0 tests=SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_SOFTFAIL,URI_HEX X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: softfail (athena.apache.org: transitioning domain of jpeng@xmatters.com does not designate 216.139.236.158 as permitted sender) Received: from [216.139.236.158] (HELO kuber.nabble.com) (216.139.236.158) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 12 Oct 2010 17:14:24 +0000 Received: from joe.nabble.com ([192.168.236.151]) by kuber.nabble.com with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1P5iQM-0007si-Qp for users@activemq.apache.org; Tue, 12 Oct 2010 10:14:02 -0700 Date: Tue, 12 Oct 2010 10:14:02 -0700 (PDT) From: jpeng To: users@activemq.apache.org Message-ID: <1286903642762-2992321.post@n4.nabble.com> In-Reply-To: References: <1286483767967-2967501.post@n4.nabble.com> <1286561073327-2968819.post@n4.nabble.com> Subject: Re: Configuring Distributed Queues in Store/Forward Network MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I have changed my test case and set the prefetch for the fast consumer to 100 and the prefetch for the slow consumer is still 1. The results didn't really change. 50 messages were processed by the fast consumer and 50 messages were processed by the slow consumer. Attached is the test case and the logs from the test: http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/file/n2992321/SharedQueueTest.java SharedQueueTest.java http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/file/n2992321/amq.logs amq.logs Thanks, Jim -- View this message in context: http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/Configuring-Distributed-Queues-in-Store-Forward-Network-tp2967501p2992321.html Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.