activemq-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Torsten Mielke <tors...@fusesource.com>
Subject Re: Reply:Re:Re:Re: Why does consumer has a lower performance comparing with producer?
Date Thu, 27 Oct 2011 07:26:07 GMT
Could the performance numbers be possibly related to application level code?
There are a couple of JMS load test tools available, I like to use the maven-activemq-performance-plugin
http://activemq.apache.org/activemq-performance-module-users-manual.html

as it supports testing for many different use-cases, including batched transactions.



On Oct 21, 2011, at 3:49 AM, lzr wrote:

> I've tested consume the messages without the jms.useCompression in the connection:
> Producer took 55 seconds (5 seconds to send them with jms.useCompression=true) to send
all the 10000 messages.
> Consumer used 80 seconds to receive all the 10000messages.
> The consumer performance is same as before. It seemed that this parameter didn't affect
the message receiving.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> At 2011-10-21 08:38:50,lzr <jswqne@163.com> wrote:
>> Have you ever test the performance of the "consumer.receive"?
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> At 2011-10-20 17:23:30,SuoNayi <suonayi2006@163.com> wrote:
>>> I have tested the performance of the consumer before some days, it 's not possible
consumer is slower than producer so much.
>>> you can try to set messagelistener for  consumer instead of  using  the  synchronous
method consumer.receive().
>>> 
>>> At 2011-10-20 16:49:18,lzr <jswqne@163.com> wrote:
>>>> Yes, I run the both consumer and producer in Eclipse. When the sent done,
start consumer to receive the messages from queue.
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> At 2011-10-20 16:20:09,lzr <jswqne@163.com> wrote:
>>>>> Yes, its are persistent messages.
>>>>> As these messages in a huge transaction, without compression property
set the broker will run out of memory.
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> At 2011-10-20 15:42:28,"Torsten Mielke" <torsten@fusesource.com>
wrote:
>>>>>> Are these persistent messages? 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> From my own performance tests I know that enqueuing a persistent
message takes longer than dequeuing it, which is the opposite behavior from what you're seeing.
Persistent msgs need to be persisted to the brokers store. 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Do you encounter the same behavior when turning off compression?
>>>>>> Are producer/broker/consumer on the same machine?
>>>>>> Also, I presume there are no transactions used?
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Torsten Mielke
>>>>>> torsten@fusesource.com
>>>>>> tmielke@blogspot.com
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> On Oct 20, 2011, at 9:32 AM, lzr wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> In my cases, I produces and consumes messages with big data:
40K per message, 10000 messages produced and consumed for each exchange. For better performance
I used jms.useCompression in my connection and it did work well:
>>>>>>> 10000 messages sent in 5 seconds;
>>>>>>> But my consumer takes about 70 seconds to receive these messages
from queue (Just received, no process to message).
>>>>>>> How is the consumer so lower than producer? Is there any optimization
to the consumer?
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> It's much appreciated if any suggestions!
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Best regards,
>>>>>>> Zhuran Li
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 

Torsten Mielke
torsten@fusesource.com
tmielke@blogspot.com




Mime
View raw message