activemq-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From lzr <jsw...@163.com>
Subject Re:Reply:Reply:Re:Re:Reply:Re:re:About the efficiency of the consumer creation.
Date Wed, 30 Nov 2011 05:09:53 GMT
>>>You'd better learn how to respect others at first before you ask for more help
again.I really feel not very happy for this. How can you say like that?
Following your suggestions, I almost trying all the possible parameters what I can figure
out.
Maybe the parameter and the codes doesn't in normal status because of my revision back and
forth.
The reason I want more help is the project is urgent and I really have no more time to make
deep research.


With and without transaction the performance is different greatly, for same business logic;
This is what I see from my testing.
OK, forget it! I'll try other open source MOM.


Thanks a lot any way,
Zhuran Li


At 2011-11-30 11:54:07,SuoNayi <suonayi2006@163.com> wrote:
>I glanced round your code which is not normative and found that you didnot follow what
I had suggested.
>You'd better learn how to respect others at first before you ask for more help again.
>
>
>
>At 2011-11-29 17:07:37,SuoNayi <suonayi2006@163.com> wrote:
>
>In addition, you may try the following as well:
>3,vmCursor will help  to increase the performance of consumers but you'd better enable
producerFlowControl if you do not want to get an OOM.
>4,for queue enabling optimizedDispatch will be helpful too.
>5,consumer with transaction should be faster than that wihtout transaction.
>But if you commit the transaction each time consuming a message it will be slower indeed.
>At 2011-11-29 10:21:48,lzr <jswqne@163.com> wrote:
>
>Here comes more performance test information:
>Without transaction, I can perform the flow about 500 times per second.
>With transaction, it's only 20 times per second.
>
>
>
>At 2011-11-29 09:35:30,lzr <jswqne@163.com> wrote:
>
>Thanks a lot for your timely response!
>I'll try it again following up your advice.
>I make further test with transaction and found it gets worse and worse:(
>Following are my cases:
>Client sends request 1 to queue S1, then wait response 1;
>Server1 receives request 1 and sends request 2 to queue S2, then wait response 2;
>Server2 receives request 2 and sends response 2 back;
>Server1 receives response 2 and sends response 1 back;
>Client receives response1 and records , the flow is done.
>
>
>
>At 2011-11-28 17:19:46,SuoNayi <suonayi2006@163.com> wrote:
>
>It takes more than one network trips(1.5  network trip in fact) when a consumer is created
and closed.
>
>Broker will keep the status of all consumers so your use case may cause broker overheat.
>You may try the following:
>1,ensuring only one connection is created and reused it always.
>   Do not create connection every time when you need create session, producer or consumer
etc.
>2,Property named alwaysSessionAsync of ConnectionFactory is set to be false(default true).
>
>At 2011-11-28 16:17:10,lzr <jswqne@163.com> wrote:
>
>MessageConsumer creating and closing frequently!
>
>
>
>At 2011-11-28 10:51:12,SuoNayi <suonayi2006@163.com> wrote:
>
>
>Only creating consumers no close?
>Note that with sparse match of selector, you may get into the trouble of dispatching message.
>
>
>
>--
>
>Wangyin
>SuoNayi2006@163.com 
> 
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message